Fait accompli: Chairman says changes to Local Plan ignore local's views

Sad to say that my experience with our Planning Department with regards to building developments is that the residents' views are not even taken into account - let alone heeded! There should be something we can do to have a voice.

We live very close to Wilmslow Garden Centre and the traffic to the Stanneylands Road/Manchester Road traffic lights is horrendous in the rush hour and often from mid afternoon. There are far too many cars on the road in this area and with hundreds of additional homes the plan is crazy! Why are green belt sites being destroyed when there are so many brown field sites needing redevelopment such as Cypress House which has been empty for many years?

What I would like to know is simple. We are told that Cheshire East has issued planning in the last 5 years for 18,000 houses of which only 3000 odd have been built.
Is this figure included or excluded from the 30,000 that is the supposed number of new houses in all Cheshire East.
If not, the whole eastern part of Cheshire will be swamped with housed. Can one of our learned CE Councillors enlighten us.
Also where are the sewage treatment plants for all these extra houses. We know that the sewage farm must be overloaded, as all of Bollin Park sewage will be released near midnight, daily.
So with 2000 houses at Handforth, and maybe more at Stanneylands and Dene Road, o where will it all go?
Please enlighten me?

It is really good to read that Keith Purdom and his WTC team are finally waking up to the weight of very well informed public opposition to the Local Plan and its allocated sites for Wilmslow. But the process has been going on for some three years now with little opposition coming from our local Conservative Councillors. In fact just the opposite. As Pete Taylor has pointed out last week a named vote for those supporting the previous version of the plan lists Councillors Rod Menlove and Gary Barton, along with all other Conservative Councillors present at that meeting. Moving on in the process the revised plan was adopted by the Cheshire East Cabinet with Councillor Don Stockton speaking in support and voting in favour. Both meetings approved the removal of Wilmslow lands from the Green Belt.

In the run up to the elections last May Conservative flyers told of their objection to 75 houses being proposed on Royal London. It was left to Residents of Wilmslow (RoW) canvassing for now Councillors Toni Fox and David Jefferay to inform the people the Conservatives were though in favour of offices and a hotel being built here. Keith Purdom has recently owned up to this.

A very significant piece of research WTC could have done, starting early in the process, would have been to afford a consultant to conduct their own Urban Potential Assessment, to speak with owners of brown sites in Wilmslow to ascertain the availability of their land for development. Without doubt this would have gone a long way towards saving some of the Green Belt and supported their "Brownfield First" policy.

In the final analysis it is very difficult for Conservative Councillors to stand against the party when it comes to strategic planning. However, in spending money to ensure every resident has a chance to participate in the forthcoming public consultation WTC has a real opportunity to represent their public by recommending a "No" vote to the sites Cheshire East is allocating to Wilmslow.

I have to say at the outset, I am in full agreement with Cllr Purdom's concerns with the way in which Cheshire East is so clearly snubbing Wilmslow. However, in view of Cllr Purdom's dismay, it would be the honourable course of action for all the Wilmslow Town Council's Conservatives to express their dissatisfaction by resigning en mass. That would send a powerful message to Sandbach. It maybe that RoW would be willing to come to some form of cooperation with the former councillors.

CEC has mysteriously, well for reasons best known to Cheshire East, chosen to increase the housing at Royal London, pulled a dead rabbit out of a hat at Stanneylands and added a site at Heathfield Farm. Incidentally, Heathfield's ownership is now a registered Guernsey company, thus any development windfall will result in a nil tax benefit, with Wilmslow's tax payers bearing the tax brunt & the social consequences of the sale & development here.

Apart from Royal London, none of these sites were included in the Wilmslow Vision document of March 2012 and so the public has not been consulted on Heathfield & Stanneylands. Only Royal London was included in the submission version of the Local Plan in March 2014. Thus, whilst the selected three sites are out for public consultation, there will be no true "consultation" as CEC has clearly chosen what it wants without regard for the town's residents views i.e. which three of these three do you want!

Royal London's farmed field west of Alderley Road was projected to come out of the Green Belt by CEC. RoW, when questioning both George Osborne MP & the then council leader Cllr Jones, about the loss of the green belt protection here, was assured by these two gentlemen that the field was to be re designated "protected open green space" - whatever this meant. When we questioned them further as to the protection here, they assured us that the new designation was far more rigorous than "mere" green belt. Oh yes? So much for our political leaders' words! What are they worth now? I suggest nothing, worthless.

Looking at the proposed "employment" land grab, the CEC LP document has increased this element requirement from 8 ha (hectares) to 10 ha. However,it completely ignores the new Waters development, opened in Sept 2014, & the development at the former Brybor Kennels of 0.6 ha, now under construction, both within the LP life span (2010 to 2030). These two sites total 15.6 ha, over 50% more land than the LP suggests is needed. Both of these are within the Green Belt.
Why have these two employment sites been brushed out of the LP and the public's view? What is CEC's questionable game? Questions to be asked of CEC's planners & leadership.

The story doesn't end there. The misrepresentation of employment sites continues -
CS26 - Royal London - council proposing additional 5 ha for new commercial development plus a hotel of unspecified area, on Green Belt

CS27 - Wilmslow Business Park (between the rail line & by-pass adjacent to RL) - council proposing 6.3 ha, on Green Belt.
The maths: 5 + 6.3 = 11.3 ha PLUS 15.6 at Waters & Brybor = 26.9 ha PLUS the hotel. This is a 170% increase in commercial development, all to
to feed some uncaring, community destroying & greedy land owners, like the above mentioned mutual. The 170% increase in commercial development will be at a destructive loss of highly valuable community Green Belt protection.

What sort of conversations has Royal London had with CEC? We know the company has threatened to throw its toys out of the pram if it couldn't get its own way, so call its bluff CEC and negotiate from there. CEC's negotiators, as Vic Barlow has rightly alluded to in his article, are woefully poor and inept. I, we, could teach them some valuable lessons but it may well be far too late, they have done the damage.

Either clearly CEC states it needs 10 ha or it wants 29.6+. If the latter, Wilmslow is well over that requirement.

So what is going on? We need to ask, we need forthright answers, before this whole area is destroyed for ever under concrete. Is this the legacy we wish to leave our children, grandchildren & beyond?

As yet CEC makes no mention of the 180,000 sq ft of empty office space in Wilmslow, plus 500,000 sq ft of empty office space in Handforth. What are our council and its officers playing at? If Royal London wishes to expand, move into the town centre and help revitalise the centre. Royal London is not averse to having multi office locations, currently starring in London, Reading, Edinburgh (2 sites), Glasgow and Wilmslow.

Do not forget we are dealing with a council that has “form” in the planning realm! Cheshire East's leadership and officers need to be asked very searching questions as to their competency, abilities and nous, indeed called to book.

Drawing up an appropriate Local Plan is clearly a massive operation that requires wisdom and ability and the capacity to combine these to good effect. Merely reading the documentation is a full time occupation. So I hope it is not irreverent to observe, by way of agreement with your other contributors, that Cheshire East appears to have chosen sites that it ought not to have chosen, and not chosen those sites that it should have chosen. Unfortunately, it's a serious matter for Cheshire East residents.

How did this happen? Can it be fixed? How do we fix it? Where do we go from here?

I have spent much of today (Thursday) as an observer at the Cheshire East Council Strategic Planning Board meeting at which the Board members voted by a clear majority to submit the revised Strategic Local Plan for approval at the full CEC Council meeting next Friday. The only two people to speak out on behalf of Wilmslow were Residents of Wilmslow representatives. There were no Wimslow Town Councillors present ... but there could have been since virtually every other Town, Village & Parish Council in the Borough had their say. It is also diabolical that there is no Wilmslow CEC Councillor on the Strategic Planning Board ... consequently there was no discussion by Councillors on any of the Wilmslow sites! But our Councillors could have asked another Councillor to speak up on our behalf.

It is almost too late in the day for WTC members to lament over the contents of the revised Local Plan ... and those who were Councillors at the time of the Wilmslow Vision & first submission of the Local Plan were led by the nose by the vested interests of the landowners, especially Royal London. Time now for our CEC Councillors to at last stand up & be counted ... speak up at the full Council Meeting next Friday and show that you do listen to your electors; not to do so will come back to haunt you!

http://bit.ly/1Qoep4p
Here we have our CEC and WTC Councillor, Mr Barton, who voted (with our other "representatives") for removing several large areas of Green Belt land from the Local Plan, yet who, when faced by an application to build houses on a miniscule piece of land, just over his back fence, moved heaven and earth to get it rejected. I congratulated him at the time on the refusal, because this development was wrong.
Since then he, and Cllr Menlove and Cllr Stockton (let's forget about Keegan, his litigational fish is still, reportedly, frying), who also voted to dump or Green Belt have been totally silent.

I look forward to reading forth-coming editions of Private Eye magazine.

WTC councilors should all resign.
They have failed to influence the big things that matter most to the town.

They are clearly not fit for purpose and are a layer of beurocracy we do not need.

I would like to put precisely the opposite case to Mr Goldsmith. This administration of this country is far too centralised with too many decisions taken in London without reference to the regions. Devolution to Scotland and Wales has helped, but in England we struggle to find meaningful ways of devolving power from the centre. In my opinion to work up from the lowest level of government and to pass down power to that level unless there is a good reason not to should be the rule. The same principle should be applied from the EU down. Wilmslow Town Council has too few powers and not too many. In the current Local Plan debate Wilmslow Town Council can influence but it cannot decide. One can argue about whether Wilmslow Town Councillors should be at this public meeting or that public meeting, and political points can be scored. Wilmslow town council is an elected body with a mandate less than 12 months old. It will continue to represent the people of Wilmslow to the very best of the Councillors' ability. Councillor Keith Purdom's recent public announcement is a principled and clear statement of the frustration felt, that despite our best efforts no one seems to be listening at the next level up. All of those who share Keith's concerns should back him and the Town Council. A divided opposition is rarely successful. KEITH CHAPMAN (Town Councillor, Wilmslow East)

I wish Mr Purdom & his WTC team had entered this process 3 years ago - Bit late now to start entering the process.............Or does he feel it's a case of "better late than never" to save face?

Mark, I would refer you to a statement (Editor's note - published on wilmslow.co.uk in December 2015 - http://bit.ly/1RQeopW) which was issued by Councillor Purdom some while ago setting out the role of Wilmslow Town Council in the Local Plan Process. This makes it clear that Wilmslow Town Council had been fully engaged since 2012. The frustration is that in common with every other group who have tried to influence the plan we have not been listened to. KEITH CHAPMAN (Town Councillor, Wilmslow East).

Councillor Chapman's remarks are most welcome. However, he fails to grasp the point being made by a number of respondents to this article.

Whilst RoW does not agree with WTC's acceptance of some aspects of the LPS that affect Wilmslow, we do fully appreciate that your voiced concerns are being ignored, along with many other such bodies. We fully understand that all town & parish councils are at the bottom of the "democratic" ladder and are powerless in the current LPS process.

Without doubt, the strongest voice WTC, and other similar bodies up & down England, have is to show their strongly felt opposition to the rape of our green & pleasant land by greedy developers aided and abetted by feeble borough councils and a blinkered government is to resign. Only when there is a mass resignation by Conservative town councillors will the Conservative government start to take our very real concerns and dissatisfaction with the current planning mayhem seriously.

This may be the one and only way to get Whitehall to listen to your very real concerns and act. And, under the circumstances, will be the honourable course of action.

Manuel, I do understand your argument but I feel to engage in national politics is not my role, or that of my fellow Wilmslow Councillors. Resignation is appropriate for failure or misbehaviour, not when you are doing your best to discharge your duties. Given that the role is unpaid, and we do not charge expenses there is no motive to stay in office apart from a wish to get the best possible outcome. We agree on many aspects of the planning process, but sometimes differ in our tactical approach. That is a healthy state of affairs in a democracy. KEITH CHAPMAN (Town Councillor, Wilmslow East)

I believe what Manuel is saying is that if you disagree with the national party policy on a subject as fundamental to local affairs as planning it is difficult to justify to electors why you stay a member of the conservative party, rather than being something like an "independent conservative". I don't think he is suggesting that resigning from the council would be useful.

Let’s be realistic, en masse resignation of Wilmslow Town Council is not going to happen and neither should it; over half of current council were only elected in May last year so have had no historic involvement in the Local Plan process. To say they should resign solely because of their national political allegiance is contrary to what seems to me to be an almost universally held belief that politics shouldn’t be part of the Town Council.

Mr Goldsmith, I take exception to your statement that the Town Council is not fit for purpose and is a layer of bureaucracy we do not need. I am confused as to what bureaucracy we (the town council) add and whether you are saying the Town Council should stay out of “the big things that matter most to the town” or should be disbanded completely? If it is the latter, I assume you would rather the town didn't have the things that the Council either organises or largely funds (via the precept) like the Wilmslow Show, Party in the Park, the Christmas lights, Incredible Edible, Wilmslow in Bloom, some of the business group events like the Motor Show, the Citizens Advice Bureau, the town’s CCTV system, and the flowers around the town to name just a few.

I accept that the Town Council has failed to influence the Local Plan but so has almost every council and pressure group in the borough so your criticism should be aimed at Cheshire East and their attitude towards consultation than the 15 members of the council who give up a significant amount of their time (for free) to try to make Wilmslow a nicer place to live.

So, rather than going back over old ground and blaming people for past (perceived) mistakes when there is work to be done, why don’t we think about what we can achieve going forward?

There are two opportunities over the next couple of months to influence the content of the Local Plan. The first is next Friday via our Cheshire East representatives who are voting on whether to approve the plan. They could vote to reject it or propose amendments. We need to make sure they are aware of and representing the views of the people who elected them just last May and are voting accordingly.

The next opportunity is during the consultation process. Again, we cannot guarantee that Cheshire East will listen to our opinions (on past performance, they won’t) but if we all comment, and they don’t listen, they will have to answer some difficult questions from the Inspector.

Councillor Jefferay has put things very well, and I fully subscribe to his point of view. We need to focus and be effective in the next stage of the consultation process. In my personal opinion Residents of Wilmslow (ROW) are striking a sensible balance between remaining strongly separate and vocal as a body, and working with the Town Council where appropriate to achieve common specific objectives. On the Neighbourhood Plan steering group a wide range of local interest groups are represented including ROW through the presence of Roger Bagguley. The Neighbourhood Plan steering group is an entirely non-political group led by an independent Chairman. The Town Council is the enabling body, but the intention is that the Steering Group should lead the project, and ensure full consultation with the people of Wilmslow, who will ultimately have a free vote in a referendum. We want to learn from the Local Plan consultation process and make sure everyone who is interested in the future of the town has their say. Wilmslow Town Councillors have decided not to lead any of the key work streams, but to ask volunteers to perform this important role in order to ensure the independence of the process. So without wishing to sound like a broken record (!) - anyone who wishes to take part is encouraged to get in touch. KEITH CHAPMAN (Town Councillor, Wilmslow East).

I believe my point of suggesting the WTC Conservative councillors should resign is not to suggest they resign from the Party. Neither do I blame them for the way their views, and others, have been largely ignored by Cheshire East Council's leadership and planners.
Clearly the problem lies in a poorly written NPPF which allows developers to ride roughshod through the planning regime; in fact it is a "developers charter".
We heard at last Thursday's SPB hearing, numerous town & parish councillors complaining bitterly their concerns for their towns have been and were continuing to be totally ignored, i.e. disregarded.
As I have written earlier, the best and strongest signal Conservative town & parish councillors across the country can send to the government about their and their voters very strong concerns with the current NPPF is to resign en masse. That could be the only signal of disquiet with the current planning mayhem the government will listen to.
My point is not party political, I am a life long Conservative, I am certain we at RoW will be pleased to work through such a mass resignation with the WTC Conservatives - under such circumstances we would reach an amicable electoral strategy with them.

CEC Cllrs Stockton, Menlove and Barton seem to be rather quiet. As far as I can recall Mr Stockton has never contributed to this (or any other local website) even when the car-park wars were raging on the road where he lives in Alderley Edge, he maintained a remarkable silence (how did the people of Lacey Green ever come to elect this fellow?). Half a world away...
Mr (Lyme Green fiasco) Menlove is not to be seen, unless he is advocating the painting of double-yellow lines up and down his own street and Mr Barton has been singularly silent since he, rightfully, objected to the building of houses just over his back fence.
All three of these Gentlemen voted against maintaining Wilmslow/Handforth Green Belt. Not one of them has ever offered a word of explanation for their actions; despite the clearly-expressed views of their electorate.