Post by petethepen on Mar 25, 2013 12:27:21 GMT
Hi Folks
A big congratulations to Liz and the team for getting so much done so quickly.
My point for discussion relates to the area that the Group wishes to consider its neighbourhood. It would certainly be possible to lay down the boundaries as the A534 (Congleton Road), the M6 and the A533 (Newcastle Road) since this is a very discrete zone. However, a quick glance at Google Earth shows just how much green field land this leaves for rapacious developers to devour.
I would suggest that the Group should also include the area south of the Newcastle Road delimited by the stream that become the River Wheelock. Thus the Neighbourhood would contain both rural suburban housing and greenbelt.
My logic for widening the focus is that it then becomes possible to think of the Neighbourhood plan involving wildlife conservation, wider non-motorised transport networks (footpaths and cycling routes), not to mention things like neighbourhood energy generation (neighbourhood owned wind turbines), employment opportunities, etc. By including this wider area and widening the scope of the Plan, we can knock down any accusation that this is just another NIMBY group.
So what do others think?
Regards
Pete
A big congratulations to Liz and the team for getting so much done so quickly.
My point for discussion relates to the area that the Group wishes to consider its neighbourhood. It would certainly be possible to lay down the boundaries as the A534 (Congleton Road), the M6 and the A533 (Newcastle Road) since this is a very discrete zone. However, a quick glance at Google Earth shows just how much green field land this leaves for rapacious developers to devour.
I would suggest that the Group should also include the area south of the Newcastle Road delimited by the stream that become the River Wheelock. Thus the Neighbourhood would contain both rural suburban housing and greenbelt.
My logic for widening the focus is that it then becomes possible to think of the Neighbourhood plan involving wildlife conservation, wider non-motorised transport networks (footpaths and cycling routes), not to mention things like neighbourhood energy generation (neighbourhood owned wind turbines), employment opportunities, etc. By including this wider area and widening the scope of the Plan, we can knock down any accusation that this is just another NIMBY group.
So what do others think?
Regards
Pete