Pre Submission Core Strategy : Suggested responses
Open this Consultation website link and refer to our guide: [OR if you don’t like the on-line version you could just add a comment to our pre-written objection letter and post it back to Cheshire East – print it off through this link……2nd Consultation Comment Letter ]. Needs to be there by 16th.
|
Source paragraph or document ref. |
Statement |
Implications for Goostrey |
Suggested Response |
3.72 |
Local Service Centres in Cheshire East are Alderley Edge, Audlem, Bollington, Bunbury, Chelford, Disley, Goostrey, Haslington, Holmes Chapel, Mobberley, Prestbury, Shavington and Wrenbury. | Development on same scale as Small Towns | We object to Goostrey being classed as a LSC. Small towns and Large villages should not be treated the same as this will lead to overdevelopment of our larger villages resulting in the loss of community. We also object to Twemlow, Swettenham and Cranage being classed as part of Goostrey. They are not, they are separate villages which consider Holmes Chapel as the Local Service Centre |
8.28 |
Vision for Local Service CentresWithin the Local Service Centres of Alderley Edge, Audlem, Bollington, Bunbury, Chelford, Disley, Goostrey, Haslington, Holmes Chapel, Mobberley, Prestbury, Shavington and Wrenbury, some modest growth in housing and employment will have taken place to meet local objectively assessed needs, to reduce the level of out-commuting and to secure their continuing vitality.This may require small scale alterations to the Green Belt in some circumstances. | May lead to over development of the village. No need to change settlement boundary as 30-50 houses can be accommodated with localised infilling | Modest growth is too subjective and subject to misinterpretation. No local objective needs been assessed for Goostrey. So who is going to decide what development is required? In accordance with localism bill it should be the LSC’s themselves and their elected representatives. |
8.29 Vision for Other Settlements and Rural Areas |
By 2030, some small scale residential and employment development will have taken place in these settlements, to help to retain and sustain local services and to reduce the need to travel.The rural economy will have grown stronger and diversified, based primarily on agriculture but supplemented by appropriate small-scale tourism and visitor facilities in appropriate locations, food related businesses, recreation and other knowledge-based rural businesses, making use of ICT connectivity. At the same time, our many areas of landscape value, sites of nature conservation importance and heritage assets and their settings will have been maintained and enhanced. | This would provide a more appropriate Vision for Goostrey | Development of 30-50 houses as stated by Michael Jones in Goostrey’s AGM 2013 would mean Goostrey should be classed with Twemlow, Swettenham and Cranage as ‘Other Settlements and Rural Areas’ |
8.29 Policy PG2 |
Settlement Hierarchy Principal TownsWithin the Principal Towns of Crewe and Macclesfield, significant development will be encouraged to support their revitalisation, recognising their roles as the most important settlements in the Borough. Development will maximise the use of existing infrastructure and resources to allow jobs, homes and other facilities to be located close to each other and accessible by public transport.Key Service CentresWithin the Key Service Centres, development of a scale, location and nature that recognizes and reinforces the distinctiveness of each individual town will be supported to maintain their vitality and viability.The Key Service Centres are Alsager, Congleton, Handforth, Knutsford, Middlewich, Nantwich,
Poynton, Sandbach and Wilmslow. Local Service Centres Within the Local Service Centres, small scale development to meet localised objectively assessed needs and priorities will be supported where they contribute to the creation and maintenance of sustainable communities. The Local Service Centres are Alderley Edge, Audlem, Bollington, Bunbury, Chelford, Disley, Goostrey, Haslington, Holmes Chapel, Mobberley, Prestbury, Shavington and Wrenbury Other Settlements and Rural Areas In the interests of sustainable development, growth and investment in the other settlements should be confined to small scale infill and the change of use or conversion of existing buildings in order to sustain local services. Affordable housing development of an appropriate scale on the edge of a rural settlement to meet a particular local need may be justified, although local needs can also be met within larger settlements, dependent on location. |
Development on same scale as Small Towns. | Generally support Settlement Hierarchy. However object to Goostrey as an LSC. Refer to response in 3.72 and 8.28 |
8.59 Open Countryside Policy PG 5 |
Open Countryside1. The open countryside is defined as the area outside the settlement boundaries of those towns and villages in the Borough identified as Principal Towns, Key Service Centres or Local Service Centres. The spatial extent of open countryside is as defined in the saved policies of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan, Congleton Borough Local Plan First Review and the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan; such areas will remain as open countryside, apart from where specific changes are proposed within this document, until detailed boundaries are established in the Site Allocations and Development Policies Document and will be shown on the Adopted Policies Map of the Local Plan.2. Within the open countryside only development that is essential for the purposes of agriculture, forestry, outdoor recreation, essential works undertaken by public service authorities or statutory undertakers, or for other uses appropriate to a rural area will be permitted.3. An exception may be made where there is the opportunity for the infilling of a small gap with one or two dwellings in an otherwise built up frontage or where it can be demonstrated to be sustainable.4. The retention of gaps between settlements is important, in order to maintain the definition and separation of existing communities and the individual characters of such settlements. Such areas will be protected from inappropriate development.
4. The acceptability of such development will be subject to compliance with all other relevant policies in the Local Plan. In this regard, particular attention should be paid to design and landscape character so the appearance and distinctiveness of the Cheshire East countryside is preserved and enhanced. |
Would help maintain separation between Twemlow and Goostrey and maintain distinctiveness of the separate settlements | Support the retention of Open Countryside outside settlement boundaries. However, for the proposed 30-50 houses for Goostrey, should be no need for significant changes to the settlement boundary |
8.65 Policy PG 6 |
Spatial Distribution of Development1. Principal Towns. The Principal Towns are expected to accommodate development as shown:i. Crewe: in the order of 65 hectares of employment land and 6,850 new homes;ii. Macclesfield: in the order of 20 hectares of employment land and 3,500 new homes;2. Key Service Centres. The Key Service Centres are expected to accommodate development
as shown: i. Alsager: in the order of 35 hectares of employment land and 1,700 new homes; ii. Congleton: in the order of 24 hectares of employment land and 3,500 new homes; iii. Handforth: in the order of 10 hectares of employment land and 200 new homes; iv. Knutsford: in the order of 11 hectares of employment land and 650 new homes; v. Middlewich: in the order of 80 hectares of employment land and 1,600 new homes; vi. Nantwich: in the order of 3 hectares of employment land and 1,850 new homes; vii. Poynton: in the order of 3 hectares of employment land and 200 new homes; viii. Sandbach: in the order of 20 hectares of employment land and 1,600 new homes; ix. Wilmslow: in the order of 10 hectares of employment land and 400 new homes; 3. New Settlement. The North Cheshire Growth Village at Handforth East is expected to accommodate in the order of 12 hectares of new employment land and 1,800 new homes. Planning for Growth 4. Employment Improvement Area. The employment improvement area at Wardle is expected to accommodate in the order of 31 hectares of employment land 5. Local Service Centres. The Local Service Centres are expected to accommodate in the order of 5 hectares of employment land and 2,500 new homes. 6. Other Settlements and Rural Areas. These settlements will be expected to accommodate in the order of 5 hectares of employment land and 2,000 new homes. |
LSC’s to accommodate order of 5 hectares of employment land and 2,500 new homes. Could lead to over-development of Goostrey | Broadly support, but object to Goostrey being classed as an LSC. Refer to response in 3.72 and 8.28 |
11.14 Policy EG 1 |
Economic Prosperity1. Proposals for employment development (Use Classes B1, B2 or B8) will be supported in principle within the Principal Towns, Key Service Centres and Local Service Centres as well as on employment land allocated in the Development Plan.2. Proposals for employment development on non-allocated employment sites will be supported where they are in the right location and support the strategy, role and function of the town, as identified in Settlement Hierarchy, Spatial Distribution of Development and in any future plans, including Neighbourhood Plans, where applicable. | New industrial estates for Goostrey | Local opportunities for employment are welcomed but B1, B2 and B8 classed of development best provided in Holmes Chapel rather than Goostrey as Holmes Chapel has better local services and infrastructure. Object to Goostrey being classed as an LSC. Refer to response in 3.72 and 8.28 |
11.17 Policy EG 2 |
Rural EconomyOutside the Principal Towns, Key Service Centres and Local Service Centres, developmentsthat:1. Provide opportunities for local rural employment development that supports the vitality of rural settlements;2. Create or extend rural based tourist attractions, visitor facilities and recreational uses;
3. Encourage the retention and expansion of existing businesses, particularly through the conversion of existing buildings and farm diversification; 4. Encourage the creation and expansion of sustainable farming and food production businesses and allow for the adaption of modern agricultural practises; 5. Are considered essential to the wider strategic interest of the economic development of Cheshire East, as determined by the Council; and 6. Support the retention and delivery of community services such as shops and public houses, and village halls Will be supported where the development: i. Meets sustainable development objectives as set out in policies MP1, SD1 and SD2 of the Core Strategy; ii. Supports the rural economy, and could not reasonably be expected to locate within a designated centre by reason of their products sold(41); iii. Would not undermine the delivery of strategic employment allocations; iv. Is supported by adequate infrastructure; |
Encourage local rural employment | Supported. Local rural employment such as listed in Policy EG2should be encouraged |
11.26 EG4 |
Tourism1. The Core Strategy will protect and enhance the unique features of Cheshire East that attract visitors to the area, including their settings, whilst encouraging investment. This will be achieved through:i. The protection of Cheshire East’s tourist assets, such as Tatton Park, Quarry Bank, Little Moreton Hall, Macclesfield Silk Museum, Jodrell Bank, the Peak District National Park (adjoining the plan area), Alderley Edge, the Gritstone Trail, Tegg’s Nose Country Park, Sandstone Ridge and the waterways that support appropriate sustainable tourist related development;ii. Protecting visitor attraction sites unless it can be proven that the use is no longer economically viable;iii. Promoting the enhancement and expansion of existing visitor attractions and tourist accommodation, and the provision of new visitor and tourism facilities, in sustainable and appropriate locations; and
iv. Encouraging sustainable transport to tourist and cultural sites. 2. Proposals for tourist development of an appropriate scale, including attractions and tourist accommodation, will be supported within the Principal Towns and Key Service Centres. 3. Proposals for tourist development outside the Principal Towns and Key Service Centres will be supported where: i. Either: a. They are located within a Local Service Centre; or b. They are located within an existing or replacement building; or c. There is evidence that the facilities are required in conjunction with a particular countryside attraction; ii. And: a. The scale, design and use of the proposal is compatible with its wider landscape or townscape setting and would not detract from the character or appearance of the area; and b. It would not be detrimental to the amenities of residential areas; and c. The proposals are served by adequate access and infrastructure; and d. The site has access to local services and employment. |
Protection of tourist destinations such as Jodrell Bank is important for the rural economy in Goostrey and helps supports local businesses | Support |
12.8 Policy SC 1 |
Leisure and RecreationIn order to provide appropriate leisure and recreational facilities for the communities of Cheshire East, the Council will:1. Seek to protect and enhance existing leisure and recreation facilities, unless they are proven to be surplus to requirements or unless improved alternative provision, of similar or better quality, is to be made.2. Support and promote the provision of better leisure and recreation facilities, where there is a need for such facilities, the proposed facilities are of a type and scale appropriate to the size of the settlement, are accessible and support the objectives of the Core Strategy. The Council will:
i. Encourage facilities that serve the Borough as a whole, and facilities that attract large numbers of people, to be located, where possible, within or adjoining Crewe or Macclesfield town centres; ii. Require facilities serving Key Service Centres to be located in or adjacent to their town centre or highly accessible locations; iii. Require facilities intended to serve the everyday needs of a community or neighbourhood to be in or adjacent to the centres of Local Service Centres or other settlements; and iv. Encourage the development of shared service centres that combine public services, health and community functions in modern accessible buildings. 3. Support proposals for facilities that would not be appropriate to be located in or adjacent to centres, provided they are highly accessible by a choice of transport, do not harm the character, amenity, or biodiversity value of the area, and satisfy the following criteria: i. The proposal is a facility that: a. supports a business use; b. is appropriate in an employment area; or c. supports an outdoor sports facility, education or related community / visitor facility; or d. supports the visitor economy and is based on local cultural or existing visitor attractions. 4. Work with agencies, services and businesses responsible for providing facilities to make sure that the needs and demands of communities are met. 5. Make sure that appropriate developments contribute, through land assembly and financial contributions, to new or improved facilities where development will increase demand and / or there is a recognised shortage.(45) |
Support, Leisure andRecreation facilities in Goostrey should be protected and enhanced | Support |
12.33 Affordable Homes |
Affordable Homes1. In residential developments affordable housing will be provided as follows:i. In developments of 15 or more dwellings (or 0.4 hectares) in the Principal Towns, Key Service Centres and Local Service Centres at least 30% of all units are to be affordable;ii. In developments of three or more dwellings (or 0.2 hectares) in all other locations at least 30% of all units are to be affordable;iii. In future, where Cheshire East Council evidence, such as housing needs studies or housing market assessments, indicate a change in the Borough’s housing need the above thresholds and percentage requirements may be varied;
2. Units provided shall remain affordable for future eligible households or for the subsidy to be recycled for alternative affordable housing provision; 3. The affordable homes provided must be of a tenure, size and type to help meet identified housing needs and contribute to the creation of mixed, balanced and inclusive communities where people can live independently longer; 4. Affordable homes should be dispersed throughout the site, unless there are specific circumstances or benefits that would warrant a different approach; 5. Market and affordable homes on sites should be indistinguishable and achieve the same high design quality. Affordable homes must also be built to comply with the Homes and Communities Agency’s Design and Quality Standards April 2007 and achieve Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3(51); 6. The Council will seek to improve choice and increase supply of affordable homes to reflect that housing markets change over periods of time and therefore the products that are made available to help people access rented and other affordable housing need to change to meet these market conditions; 7. In exceptional circumstances, where scheme viability may be affected, developers will be expected to provide viability assessments to demonstrate alternative affordable housing provision(52). The developer will be required to submit an open book viability assessment. In such cases, the Council will commission an independent review of the viability study, for which the developer will bear the cost. In cases where such alternative affordable housing provision is agreed there may be a requirement for the provision of ‘overage’ payments to |
30% of new developments should be affordable homes | Support, would increase the amount of affordable homes, but only if a local assessed needs survey indicates these are required |
12.47 |
Approximately 30% of Cheshire East’s population live in Local Service Centres (LSCs), OtherSettlements and rural areas. The provision of additional housing is vital to the creation and maintenance of sustainable communities in rural areas. Further supply is required to address the cost of housing,and to enable newly forming households to remain in their communities. Additional housing can also help to improve the viability of existing or potential local services. | More houses does not mean costs come down. Only would occur if there was a dramatic oversupply of housing where there wasn’t a demand. 30-50 houses in Goostrey wouldn’t increase affordability of housing. | Comment – Additional housing should only be provided based on locally assessed needs. |
12.47 Policy SC 6 |
Rural Exceptions Housing for Local NeedsRural Exceptions affordable housing will be permitted as an exception to other policies concerning the countryside, to meet locally identified affordable housing need, subject to all of the following criteria being met:1. Sites should adjoin Local Service Centres and Other Settlements and be close to existing employment and existing or proposed services and facilities, including public transport, educational and health facilities and retail services;2. Proposals must be for small schemes; small schemes are considered to be those of 10 dwellings or fewer(53). Any such developments must be appropriate in scale, design and character to the locality;3. A thorough site options appraisal must be submitted to demonstrate why the site is the most suitable one. Such an appraisal must demonstrate why the need cannot be met within the
settlement; 4. In all cases, proposals for rural exceptions housing schemes must be supported by an up-to-date(54) Housing Needs Survey(55) that identifies the need for such provision within the Parish; 5. Occupancy will, in perpetuity, be restricted to a person in housing need and resident or working in the relevant Parish, or who has other strong links with the relevant locality in line with the community connection criteria as set out by Cheshire Homechoice, both initially and on subsequent change of occupancy. This could include Key Workers and Self Build; 6. The locality to which the occupancy criteria are to be applied is taken as the Parish, unless otherwise agreed with Cheshire East Council; 7. To ensure that a property is let or sold to a person who either lives locally or has strong local connections in the future, the Council will expect there to be a ‘cascade’ approach to the locality issue appropriate to the type of tenure. Thus, first priority is to be given to those satisfying the occupancy criteria in relation to the Parish, widening in agreed geographical stages(56). Cross Subsidy 8. Proposals must consist in their entirety of affordable housing that will be retained in perpetuity. In exceptional circumstances, proposals that intend to include an element of market housing, or plots for open market sale, may be acceptable, if they meet all of the above criteria, along with the criteria below: i. Such proposals will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the site would not be viable, as a rural exception site, without cross subsidy. The developer will be required to submit an open book viability assessment. In such cases, the Council will commission an independent review of the viability study, for which the developer will bear the cost; |
Support | |
13.146 Jodrell Bank |
Within the Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope Consultation Zone, as defined on the Proposals Map,development will not be permitted if it can be shown to impair the efficiency of the telescopes.Where development would be permitted, it will also be expected to demonstrate that it does not affect the visual impact, historic environment and setting or wider landscape setting of the Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope. | Better protection of Jodrell Bank Observatory | Support |
Appendix A Proposed Growth Distribution Table A.4 Local Service Centres |
Site Allocations 1100 | Development on same scale as Small Towns. May result in over development of Goostrey | Generally support Proposed growth. However object to Goostrey as an LSC. Refer to response in 3.72 and 8.28 |
Thank you for the information provided without which the average person would have no hope of being able to produce any meaningful comment. I have submitted my objections/Comments etc along the lines suggested.
Marvellous, please encourage others to do so too.
This is incredibly useful to draw out the key bits most sensible people will also support and object to – it’s so obviously a mistake to classify Goostrey as an LSC! Thanks also to all the people deliverying the leaflets to get the message out there – I can’t believe we’ve all had to object again, just so the council can try and sneak their views in unchallenged.
Thanks, glad it helped. Let’s hope we can get even more objections in this time round.
Any news on the final response from “Goostrey” at the end of the 2nd Consultation? E.g. Numbers who contacted Cheshire East, Where we go from here etc.
Also, why hasn’t someone just approached the Head of Whatever and just simply asked them why Goostrey has been wrongly-classified? I give up smoking soon (an annual tradition) so am more than happy to volunteer. 🙂