- CPRE National Office provides the latest information on a number of Policies and Campaigns here.

 - CPRE National Office also produces a range of publications which can be requested or purchased here.

 - CPRE National Office News Releases highlight issues of current concern.  Click here to see the latest releases, or here to search the archive.

 - Other resources which may contain relevant information can be found on our Links page, here.

M6 Expressway / widening

CPRE Cheshire Branch, two CPRE Regional Groups and National Office have been very active in challenging the Department for Transport’s (DfT’s) concept of a new tolled, privately-owned and operated M6 Expressway running from north of  Birmingham to either Knutsford or Lymm.

The DfT made their surprise announcement - that they were considering the idea of getting private funding to build a new tolled motorway - in mid-2004.  A diagrammatic cross-section in the consultation document which was launched simultaneously depicted it as running parallel to but separated from the existing M6 line.  CPRE Cheshire Branch reacted to this by issuing a press release which can be viewed here and the Branch Chairman, Richard Bass, wrote to a number of newspapers and was successful in getting his letter published in several of them.  Cheshire Transport Campaign Group Chairman, Lillian Burns, was featured in television interviews.

In order to spread the word that a live consultation was underway, CPRE Cheshire Branch produced an information leaflet about the proposal which was handed out at the shows and which has been widely distributed. With CPRE National Office support, an improved version of the original leaflet was delivered to thousands of homes in the M6 corridor area, explaining the potential environmental dangers. (To see the leaflet, press here and to see the news release on the major leafleting exercise press here)

CPRE has been conducting an extensive series of informal meetings to discuss the proposal with a number of bodies and has urged as many individuals and groups as possible to make their views on the proposal known to government.  We have also submitted our own detailed response to the consultation, backing up the National Office response. 

The response to the consultation was overwhelmingly opposed: some 98% of individual responses (i.e. excluding petitions) did not want to see the proposal implemented - a response the Government labelled 'inconclusive'!.  Despite this the Government announced, in July 2005, that they were commissioning the Highways Agency to continue to the next stage of assessing the toll road proposal.

We continued to work hard to influence decision-makers and appropriate professional groups through a variety of methods.  As an example, a strong letter to Local Transport Today magazine, responding to an article based on selective and premature 'spin' supplied by the Highways Agency, can be seen here.  This letter was printed in the September 29th 2005 edition of the magazine, which is one of the key publications for transport professionals.

The next move by the Highways Agency was to arrange a 'consultation event' in January 2006 at which more details of the proposal were given.  CPRE National Office immediately put out a press release expressing the organisation’s dismay that the whole idea had not been dropped.  CPRE Cheshire Branch followed up with a press release predicting turmoil and uncertainty for a long time to come as a result of the decision and by producing a briefing for the media, elected representatives and anyone interested in the matter.

Then, just as everyone's thoughts were turning to summer holidays, in July 2006 the Government unexpectedly announced that further studies had shown that the proposal for a separate, tolled road would be more expensive and require significantly greater land take than widening the existing route, and therefore that the Government will not undertake any further work on the concept of a separate motorway.

For further information, visit the DfT website at www.dft.gov.uk, and also visit the CPRE National Office website on www.cpre.org.uk.

Top - Main Page

The Northern Way

The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) announced a proposal to develop an  'economic growth corridor' along the length of the M62 from Liverpool to Hull which would provide the basis for economic development of the north to rival that of London and the south-east.  With spurs linking it to Sheffield in the south and Newcastle in the north it will be named ‘The Northern Way’ and will include the cities of Manchester and Leeds.  This has led to widespread concern that the proposal amounts to an extensive 'super city' stretching from Liverpool to Hull and from Leeds to Newcastle-on-Tyne.

The scheme offers a lot of benefits, and contains elements which CPRE has argued passionately for over many years.  Better use of brownfield sites, regeneration of urban areas, and revival of poor urban housing areas, are all welcome.  The scheme should help to redress the economic imbalance between North and South, and hopefully take some pressure off the countryside in other parts of the UK.  There is much to be welcomed.

The danger is that under the banner of economic revival, all sorts of things can escape proper scrutiny.  Developers will want relaxation of existing planning structures.  There will be temptations to infringe existing green belt areas.  There will be pressures to have more inappropriate out-of-town shopping centres – all requiring unsightly large developments, to the detriment of the life of local communities, and requiring more travel, more cars, and more roads, encroaching further on the countryside.

The concept of the Northern Way is being taken forward by the three northern Development Agencies whose area it spans. They have established a task force and a web site which can be found at  www.thenorthernway.co.uk.

Big swathes of the North West countryside, including much of North and Mid-Cheshire’s Green Belt, have been put under the development spotlight in the name of economic growth. A 'Growth Strategy', endorsed by the government, was published in September 2004, followed by an 'Action Plan' launched by the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, at the Sustainable Communities Summit at the end of January/beginning of February 2005.  This threatens to override regional and local planning policies for countryside protection in a rush to make the three northern regions comparable in economic performance with the South East.

Huge new ‘city regions’, where economic growth should be concentrated, are being proposed in the "Northern Way" report which could have massive implications for the countryside around North Cheshire, Warrington and Halton, Greater Manchester, Merseyside and Central and South Lancashire.  The ‘Northern Way’ agenda proposes eight ‘City Regions’ in the North.  Three of these City Regions – Manchester (which includes not only the Greater Manchester Authorities but also Cheshire’s Macclesfield, Congleton and Vale Royal Districts and Warrington), Liverpool (which includes the Wirral, Chester, Ellesmere Port and Neston, Halton and also Warrington again) and Central Lancashire – are in the North West.  They encompass Green Belt designations in Cheshire, Merseyside, Warrington, Manchester and Lancashire.

Each of the City Regions contains areas with very different economic, social and environmental characteristics.  The risk which CPRE has been voicing is that planning policies for increased rates of new housebuilding to support new workers will not recognise these different characteristics.  Policies based on economic considerations alone risk allowing housing and employment areas to spread further into the countryside instead of concentrating on the regeneration of towns and cities.

Whether these City Regions will have a positive or negative effect very much depends on how the concept is implemented.  CPRE North West Regional Group has produced a briefing setting out what CPRE sees as good and bad about the concept, in an effort to make City Regions a positive step for the North West.  The document has been sent out to town and parish councils and community groups.  Copies are available through the Cheshire Branch Office.

CPRE’s view is that we should be truly combining economic growth with environmental protection and social needs, not overriding these things for the sake of growth. It is up to local people to help make this combination really work.  CPRE are calling for environmental safeguards to be built into the Northern Way to avoid our region suffering the same problems of the South East - such as massive development pressure on greenfield sites - and destroying its current regional advantages of quality of life.

CPRE's initial response was to draw up a set of criteria against which it believed the Northern Way should be judged. CPRE's North West Regional Group, of which Cheshire is a part, along with CPRE Regional Groups from the North East and Yorkshire and Humber and CPRE National Office, produced 'Communities not Concrete - a CPRE Route Map for the Northern Way' which set out our views and recommended approach, accompanied by a Press Release drawing attention to the importance of balancing development goals with the need to preserve the precious asset of our countryside.

Our next action was to produce a critique of the Northern Way Action Plan. 'On the Right Path - How to keep the Northern Way on Course for Sustainable Development' was launched in time for the Sustainable Communities Summit, again accompanied by a Press Release.

Top - Main Page

Regional Spatial Strategy and West Cheshire/North East Wales Sub Regional Strategy

The North West Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) is being driven by the imposition of the Northern Way Growth Strategy (NWGS).  The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister wants to see the NWGS become an integral part of the RSSs for all three northern regions.

The North West Regional Assembly published this ‘masterplan’ for the region on March 20th, and the formal public consultation ran until June 12th 2006.

This strategy will have a huge impact on all development throughout the region for the next 15 years. It will set a regional framework that addresses the ‘spatial’ implications of broad issues like housing, investment, transport, the economy and environment. This is all about ‘how much’, ‘how big’ and ‘where’ in the region. For example, it:

• Determines how many new houses will be built every year in each district in the region

• Sets out the broad locations for large-scale economic development, and the amounts of land to be made available for employment uses

• Sets targets for renewable energy generation and waste management, and

• Lays down the principles that all local authorities will have to follow in drawing up local plans and considering applications for planning permission.

Getting CPRE’s views included in it is therefore vital to protecting the environment and rural communities!

There are some good points in the RSS – for example, it has a commitment to using brownfield land before greenfield for all new development, and to concentrating most new development in existing urban centres.

However, there are very worrying elements as well, for example:

CPRE will be developing its response over the next few weeks. All CPRE Branches and District groups in the region were contacted in March to let them know how them can give their views; a working group of staff and volunteers will be meeting in mid-April; and in May we will circulate a draft response for comment.

In particular, CPRE is very concerned that the RSS proposes a relaxation of the current policy of restraint in North Cheshire.  Essentially, this policy prevented urban sprawl and preserved the environmental quality of the rural/urban fringe, and directed development away from hotspots in North Cheshire in favour of regeneration priority areas, both in order to boost the economic performance of under-performing areas, and to maintain the qualities and characteristics of North Cheshire that added significantly to quality of life and the image of the North West region.

The submitted draft RSS, rather than continuing to observe this targeted restraint, now calls for more widespread growth across the southern parts of the Manchester city region. This disregards the evidence base, which suggests that this policy (and the general approach that it embodies) has been successful in achieving its aims, in both encouraging economic growth in other areas in need of regeneration and maintaining a high quality of life and attractive setting in areas under significant development pressure, where that pressure is likely to lead to negative consequences.

Cheshire Branch has part-funded an expert report which makes our case for maintaining this policy in order to maximise regeneration in the urban parts of our region. 

A series of sub-regional strategies are being proposed.  These include one for each of the 'city regions' identified in the NWGS.  In addition, the other sub-regional strategies for the North West comprise one for the Lake District, one for the rest of Cumbria and one for West Cheshire/North East Wales.  A study for West Cheshire and North East Wales which recommended high economic growth for the area was carried out in 2004. This is feeding into the development of a strategy for the sub region.  CPRE were invited to make a submission on this evolving strategy.  They chose to do this in the form of a critique of the study and a critique of the manner in which this is being carried through into the RSS process.  The submission made by CPRE Cheshire Branch can be viewed here.  Also, the Branch's subsequent comments about the sustainability appraisal and the strategic environmental assessment scoping report can be viewed here and here.

The Draft Strategy for the West Cheshire/ North East Wales Sub-Region was launched in December 2005 in Mold with a six-week consultation. Cheshire Branch's response to the consultation can be viewed here.

Top - Main Page

Night Blight

Look up at the night sky and what do you see?

Chances are that if you live in or near a city, the answer is a light grey blur with the occasional plane slicing through it.  CPRE has launched a joint campaign with the British Astronomical Association Campaign for Dark Skies to highlight the problem of light pollution. This is the unnecessary amount of artificial light that we allow to spill upwards, where it serves no useful purpose and which blocks out our view of the stars and the dark night sky.

Individual action can be taken as follows:

• You can set your own exterior lights at an angle – or shield them – so they only aim light downwards to paths and roads where it is needed and not upwards or sideways. Lighting manufacturers produce a wide range of environmentally friendly exterior lights. When you buy lights, choose ones that minimise light pollution. If you can’t find them, ask your local store to source them for you.

• Approach your local council that is responsible for lighting most of the road network, and has an important influence as a planning authority. Use the resources available from the CPRE to distribute regional maps and summary leaflets to pass on to them. Lobby for policies that restrict light pollution if they do not exist. If such a policy is in existence, you can find out how well it’s being enforced.

• CPRE could really use your help to write to key ‘opinion formers’ like local MPs, Government departments or a member of the House of Lords. For guidelines on this please contact Cheshire Branch office.

So help us to turn the tide. Light pollution may be getting worse, but as more of us become aware of what we are losing so the momentum for change will grow. Let’s bring back the Milky Way for our children and our children’s children.

You can get more information from our Branch Office, or by logging on to the CPRE National Office website.

Top - Main Page

Quiet Lanes

Prompted by Cheshire Transport Campaign Group’s lobbying, Cheshire County Council included in their first five-year Local Transport Plan (LTP) a commitment to pilot a Quiet Lanes area in the Peckforton Hills area and flagged up other potential areas for Quiet Lanes elsewhere in the county. 

In 2003 as a result of Crewe and Nantwich Borough Council withdrawing promised funding for the Peckforton Hills project and the Countryside Agency announcing that there was no sponsorship available from them for any schemes beyond the original ‘Demonstration Projects’ in the south of England, Cheshire County Council decided not to progress the Peckforton Hills scheme during the period of the current LTP. 

However, it is now going ahead with another scheme also proposed by CPRE – the Macclesfield Forest.  This small pilot in the Langley and Higher Sutton area has come about due to some funding being available via the South Pennines Integrated Transport Strategy (SPITS).  CPRE welcomes the fact that a scheme is finally getting off the ground and will be tracking its management and success. 

Top - Main Page

Other Consultation Responses

Cheshire Branch frequently inputs to CPRE National Office responses to national consultations and also occasionally makes separate submissions to nation-wide consultations when appropriate in collaboration with its National Office, (see example above under 'Housing Provision').  It also contributes to all CPRE North West Regional Group submissions, e.g. on the Regional Spatial Strategy and the Regional Economic Strategy and area-wide roads consultations such as the Highways Agency's Route Management Strategy (RMS) on the M60. (For example, click here to see the joint submission on behalf of CPRE North West Regional Group and the North West Transport Activists Roundtable to the M60 RMS).

The Branch responds when capacity permits to consultations emanating from the Local Authorities in the areas they represent. Currently, the Branch is engaging in the evolution of the new Local Development Documents whilst the TCG has sustained a pro-active approach to consultations on the Local Transport Plans in Cheshire, Warrington and Halton and on a wide variety of transport and transport-related strategies

CPRE and the ChALC

CPRE Cheshire Branch sits on several bodies alongside the Cheshire Association of Local Councils (ChALC) and a number of active CPRE members are parish councillors.  There is a close synergy between the two organisations.

Top - Main Page

© CPRE (Cheshire Branch) 2004, 2005, 2006