A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Scheme

The list below includes a record of advice we have provided for this project. For a list of all advice issued by the Planning Inspectorate, including non-project related advice, please go to the Register of advice page.

There is a statutory duty, under section 51 of the Planning Act 2008, to record the advice that is given in relation to an application or a potential application, including the name of the person who requested the advice, and to make this publicly available.

Preview
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Feedback meeting between Highways Agency and The Planning Inspectorate following the Secretary of State's decision on the Knutsford to Bowdon Project.
Please see meeting note attached

09 December 2014
Highways Agency
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Please see attached letter from Mr & Mrs Al-Hilali.
Further to my email below, please note the Inspector has exercised his discretion to accept your correspondence of 29 July which is now being made publicly available.

Please note however the contents of my email below still stands in that you will not receive correspondence from us directly so please ensure you keep yourself familiarised with the events on the project page which is set out below.
________________________________________

Thank you for your email, please note the registration period for relevant representations for this application closed on 4 July 2013. However, we will keep your comments on file and make them available to the Examining Authority who is able to exercise discretion to consider views and evidence from those who did not register a relevant representation on time. However, this does not mean that you would be regarded as an interested party for the purposes of the examination.
Going forward please be aware, as you have not registered as an ?interested party? for this scheme you will not be notified directly about the examination timetable and events related to the examination of this application. You can, however, keep up to date with the progress of the application on the Knutsford to Bowden project page on our website. Here you will find information of upcoming hearings and any procedural decisions made during the course of the examination. Below is a link to the project page:

[attachment 1]

Another option open to you is to team up with an interested party with like minded views or join a campaign group which has registered as an interested party.

The first event to be held will be the Preliminary Meeting where the timetable for the examination will be discussed, rather than the merits of the application itself. This is open to the public, however, priority in terms of seating will be given to interested parties. The Preliminary Meeting will be held on 3rd September 2013, at the Curzon Cinema. The address is as follows:

Curzon Cinema
Toft Road
Knutsford
Cheshire
WA16 0PE

Registration will begin at 10:00 and the meeting is scheduled to start at 10:30. If you wish to attend the preliminary meeting please could you inform The Planning Inspectorate by 17:00 on 30 August 2013.

If you have any queries in relation to the above or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

15 August 2013
Mr & Mrs Al-Hilali
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Please see attached letter from Mr Whittle.
I appreciate this process can be somewhat confusing however due to requirements of the legislation and the differences between the status of parties and at what stage they submit, there a number of scenarios for how we deal with correspondence of this nature.
During the process of determining an application for a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project under the Planning Act 2008 (as amended), parties who wish to become Interested Parties/make comments are required to submit a relevant representation form outlining their views concerning the proposal which the Examining Authority (ExA) then uses (along with the application documents) to identify the principal issues, these are set out in the letter of 24 July inviting parties to attend the Preliminary Meeting (PM) and are contained within Annex C.

Other than legislative requirements such as the applicant having to carry out notification and the arrangements of the PM, the next time material of this nature is (in theory) supposed to be submitted is during the first round of the timetable which is generally responses to the ExA's questions, comments on relevant representations and written representations etc. That being said, often correspondence is received from parties during the pre-examination stage and these are treated accordingly which are dependant upon whether the person is an interested party as defined by the regulations (for example yourself as you in are in part 2 category 3 of the book of reference which gives you an automatic interested party status) and the ExA's decision whether or not to exercise his discretion to accept late/additional representations.

A proposed draft examination timetable which is also set out in the letter of 24 July and contained within in Annex D, sets out the proposed deadlines for material to be received. These are what the ExA intends to set subject to any input from parties which he will take into consideration before setting the finalised timetable. Soon after the PM, the finalised timetable will be issued and all parties will be expected to adhere to these deadline so if you wish to raise any issues during the examination please ensure they are made in accordance with the timetable.

Since originally writing to you, the ExA has seen your correspondence and has decided to accept it and therefore a copy will in fact now be made publicly available. Following this, other than adhering to any of the ExA's requests for further material, you will not be required to re submit your correspondence in your email of 5 July or letter of 2 August.

I hope the above has clarified the approach taken, if you have any further queries please let me know.

15 August 2013
Bill Whittle
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Please see attached letter from Mr S Tucker.
Please note that your correspondence was received after the close of the relevant representations period which ended on 4 July 2013 and before the examination has started. Your clients are however identified within part 2, category 3 of the book of reference so they automatically have an Interested Party status however as this was received outside of the registration period, a copy of your email and attachment has been forwarded to the Examining authority (ExA) for him to decide whether or not to accept it at this stage.

I can confirm the ExA has since exercised his discretion to accept your correspondence. It will now be made publicly available however please ensure that any issues you wish to raise as part of the examination are made in accordance with the examination timetable as all parties will be expected to adhere to this.

In terms of the PM, it is important that all parties participate at this meeting should they wish to raise any issues with the proposed examination timetable and the matters set out in the agenda. However, if an interested party is not able to attend then there is the option to send a representative on their behalf or submit their views on the agenda items in writing in advance of the PM. The ExA will consider all submissions made orally and in writing in relation to the examination timetable and the other agenda items. Please send any written submissions of this nature to us by 30 August. Shortly after the PM, the finalised timetable will be published and issued to all parties.

If you have any further queries regarding this or any other matter please contact me.

15 August 2013
Mr S Tucker
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
E-mail received by the Planning Inspectorate from Matt Parkinson below:

I am a local resident living near to the proposed A556 bypass. I believe that the scheme has progressed to the next stage in the planning process. At first this surprised me because the consultation process was wholly inadequate and unfair. However, a senior figure at the Environment Agency has just told me that if a project is in the Governments' top 50 infrastructure schemes then the NID will simply just 'nod' the scheme through irrespective of whether the consultation was adequate or fair; or even on the merits of the scheme. Is this true?
As you referred to in your e-mail, the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon scheme was accepted for examination by the Planning Inspectorate on 17 May 2013.

Please be assured that a decision was made in accordance with section 55 of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) which included having regard to the consultation report and taking into account responses to the adequacy of consultation. The section 55 checklist which is used during the decision making as to whether an application is fit to progress to examination contains the reasoning and comments on acceptance and is publicly available at the following link:

[attachment 1]

The Planning Inspectorate is impartial and ensures processes are strictly adhered to and the material from both pre application and acceptance period was taken into consideration when reaching a decision to accept this application for examination. You will shortly have an opportunity to submit a relevant representation which will be made available to the Examining authority once they are appointed.
Our advice notes explain how and when you can get involved in the process and in particular, advice note 8 will be of particular interest to you, I have included a link for ease:

[attachment 2]

23 May 2013
Matt Parkinson
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Letter sent by e-mail to the Planning Inspectorate from Lillian Burns attached:
Response from the Planning Inspectorate attached:

22 May 2013
NWTAR - Lillian Burns
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
E-mail received by the Planning Inspectorate from Lorraine Robinson:

I was surprised and dismayed yesterday to discover that HA?s proposal has been accepted for examination.

How has this been allowed to happen when you have not yet received the Adequacy of Consultation Representation from Cheshire East Council, the only relevant council? How can councils as far away as Derbyshire, Staffordshire etc comment competently on how a consultation was conducted fifty miles away?

You may remember a series of telephone conversations we had in the autumn of 2012, in which we discussed HA?s appallingly inadequate and unfair consultation. Your advice was to write to CEC informing them of this, I did so, as did a couple of dozen others, specifically requesting that they take account of it in their Representation. What was the point of this advice if you simply go ahead without waiting for it? What will happen if CEC submits an honest Representation demonstrating that HA?s consultation was unfair? Will the acceptance be overturned?

Furthermore, it has come to my attention that transport consultants, CBO, have written informing you that HA have ?sneaked in? entirely new sections of the scheme ? relating to the widening of motorway junctions at either end of the proposed dual carriageway - on which locals were never consulted. It is my understanding that HA have broken the law in this respect yet their proposal has been accepted.

You gave me your assurance that The Planning Inspectorate was impartial and that all due processes would be strictly adhered to, in fact you appear to have had no regard for due process. Has the Inspectorate acted illegally? If so, what action can I take?

Please explain how and why this scheme has been accepted given the above.
Response from the Planning Inspectorate:

Thank you for your email to Kathryn Powell, as advised, please note Kathryn is no longer leading on this case so please ensure all future correspondence is sent to me directly as the Case Manager using the contact details below or email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> .

Whilst I appreciate you are dissatisfied with the decision to accept this application for examination however please be assured that a decision was made in accordance with section 55 of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) which included having regard to the consultation report and taking into account responses to the adequacy of consultation. The section 55 checklist which is used during the decision making as to whether an application is fit to progress to examination contains the reasoning and comments on acceptance and is publicly available at the following link:
[attachment 1]

Cheshire East Council is the host authority however in terms of consulting others such as Derbyshire and Staffordshire etc, this is a requirement within section 43 of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended). During the acceptance process, amongst others, a representation from Cheshire East Council was received and has also been made publicly available at the following link: [attachment 2].

As Kathryn previously advised, the Planning Inspectorate is impartial and ensures processes are strictly adhered to and the material from both pre application and acceptance period was taken into consideration when reaching a decision to accept this application for examination. You will shortly have an opportunity to submit a relevant representation which will be made available to the Examining authority once they are appointed.

Our advice notes explain how and when you can get involved in the process and in particular, advice note 8 will be of particular interest to you, I have included a link for ease: [attachment 3] <[attachment 4];

Further contact to Lorraine Robinson as she was initially given an incorrect link to the s.55 checklist on our website:

Please note the link below for the s.55 checklist which has been replaced as follows:

[attachment 1]

If you have any problems opening this, please let me know

22 May 2013
Lorraine Robinson
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Dear Ms Sully

I would like to reiterate what has been communicated by Ms Lorraine Robinson (21.05.2013):

As I, too, am surprised and dismayed to discover that HA?s proposal has been accepted for examination.
How has this been allowed to happen when you have not yet received the Adequacy of Consultation Representation from Cheshire East Council, the only relevant council?
How can councils as far away as Derbyshire, Staffordshire etc comment competently on how a consultation was conducted fifty miles away?
Apparently you had a series of telephone conversations with Ms Robinson in Autumn 2012, when the HA?s appallingly inadequate and unfair consultation was discussed. You advised writing to CEC informing them of this and, indeed, many of us (residents) did so, specifically requesting that they take account of it in their Representation.
What was the point of this advice if you simply go ahead without waiting for it? What will happen if CEC submits an honest Representation demonstrating that HA?s consultation
was unfair? Will the acceptance be overturned?
Furthermore, I understand that transport consultants, CBO, have written informing you that HA have ?sneaked in? entirely new sections of the scheme ? relating to the widening of motorway junctions at either end of the proposed dual carriageway - for which locals have never been consulted. It is my understanding that HA have, therefore, broken the law in this respect; yet their proposal has been accepted?

You gave Ms Robinson your assurance that The Planning Inspectorate was impartial and that all due processes would be strictly adhered to, in fact you appear to have had no regard for due process. Has the Inspectorate acted illegally? If so, what action can we take?

Please explain how and why this scheme has been accepted given the above

Yours sincerely

Fay Armstrong (Mrs)
Dear Mrs Armstrong

Thank you for your email.

As per the response I have just emailed to Ms Robinson, whilst I appreciate you are dissatisfied with the decision to accept this application for examination, please be assured that a decision was made in accordance with section 55 of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) which included having regard to the consultation report and taking into account responses to the adequacy of consultation. The section 55 checklist which is used during the decision making as to whether an application is fit to progress to examination contains the reasoning and comments on acceptance and is publicly available at the following link:
[attachment 1]

Cheshire East Council is the host authority however in terms of consulting others such as Derbyshire and Staffordshire etc, this is a requirement within section 43 of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended). During the acceptance process, amongst others, a representation from Cheshire East Council was received and has also been made publicly available at the following link: [attachment 2].

The Planning Inspectorate is impartial and ensures processes are strictly adhered to and the material from both pre application and acceptance period was taken into consideration when reaching a decision to accept this application for examination. You will shortly have an opportunity to submit a relevant representation which will be made available to the Examining authority once they are appointed.

Our advice notes explain how and when you can get involved in the process and in particular, advice note 8 will be of particular interest to you, I have included a link for ease: [attachment 3]

If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely

Kay Sully

22 May 2013
Fay Armstrong
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please see the correspondence from Lillian Burns and Adrian Dunning on behalf of the North West Transport Activists' Roundtable in the Adequacy of Consultation folder
Planning Inspectorate's responses attached.

15 May 2013
NWTAR - Lillian Burns
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please see the correspondence from Paul Corbett on behalf of CBO Transport in the Adequacy of Consultation folder
Please see the Planning Inspectorate's responses attached

14 May 2013
Paul Corbett
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please see the correspondence from Suzi Cowan on behalf of The A556 Lobby Group in the Adequcy of Consultation folder
Please see the Planning Inspectorate's responses attached

08 May 2013
The A556 Lobby Group - Suzi Cowan
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please see the correspondence from Mr Hodgson on behalf of Mere Parish Council attached
Please see the Planning Inspectorate's response attached

08 May 2013
Mere Parish Council - Ian Hodgson
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please see attachment.

12 April 2013
Anna Pickering
Enquiry received via phone
response has attachments
Email and telephone conversation regarding the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon proposal. Queries were raised regarding how to make comments on the adequacy of the applicant's consultation and also regarding submissions at examination.
The following advice was provided:

You raised a query as to whether the Planning Inspectorate will take 'unfair consultation' into account when deciding if the application can be accepted for examination (during the acceptance stage). As discussed on the telephone, if persons are concerned about the consultation undertaken by the applicant during the pre-application stage, they should inform the local authority and the applicant of this. Local authorities have an opportunity to submit comments on the adequacy of the applicant's consultation during the acceptance stage (once the application is submitted). In addition, all correspondence received by the Planning Inspectorate before the submission of the application will be available to the decision maker during the 28 day acceptance stage.

In the telephone conversation you asked how the Examining authority will have regard to different types of submissions (for example the use of figures compared to reasoned logical arguments) during the examination of an application. I believe the Planning Inspectorate's Advice Note 8.5 answers your queries, therefore I have provided a link to this advice below:

[attachment 1]

For example on page 3 the advice note states the following:

'Please ensure that you post or email your written representation in good time for us to receive it by the specified deadline.

Please remember that the purpose of written representations is to provide the Examining Authority with submissions and evidence regarding issues which are important and relevant to the consideration of the application. You may provide as much or as little detail as you wish in your written representation, but a representation is more likely to carry weight with the Examining Authority if it is specific and supported by evidence.

You can also comment on representations made by others within the timescale set out in the examination timetable.'

05 April 2013
A556 Lobby Group Suzi Cowan
Enquiry received via phone
response has attachments
Email and telephone conversation regarding the A556 Knutsford to Bowdon proposal. The Planning Inspectorate agreed to send advice notes, and would later send a more detailed response to the queries raised.
The following information was provided via email:

Following receipt of your email and our telephone conversation today, I have included a link below to the National Infrastructure Planning portal website where you will find advice notes on the Planning Act 2008 process:

Advice notes 8.1 to 8.5 provide advice on the process and how to get involved:
[attachment 1]

In our telephone conversation I mentioned the acceptance checklist which is completed during the acceptance stage of an application. The link below will take you to a copy of this checklist for your information:
[attachment 2]

02 April 2013
A556 Lobby Group Suzi Cowan
Enquiry received via email
The Highways Agency e-mailed the Planning Inspectorate with information on the likely submission date and the timing of the Highways Agency?s response to matters previously raised by the Planning Inspectorate at a meeting (and in correspondence) on 21 February 2013.
The following advice was issued to the Planning Inspectorate:

We strongly advise the Highways Agency to liaise further with the Planning Inspectorate prior to the submission of the application. This will enable the Planning Inspectorate to consider the Highways Agency?s intended approach and (if necessary) provide section 51 advice in accordance with the Planning Act 2008 as amended (PA 2008).

The scheme appears to have altered since the statutory consultation was undertaken from January to April 2012, with the publication of an Emerging Proposed Design Changes Post Consultation Plan and letter issued by the Highways Agency in July 2012. Since July 2012 and upon receipt of the draft plans in January 2013, the scheme appears to have evolved further, an example of which is the addition of the works to the M6 (as discussed in February 2013) and also works to the M56, amongst other changes.

The Highways Agency is advised to consider whether statutory consultation in accordance with Chapter 2 of the PA 2008 has been undertaken for all aspects of the scheme which is due to be submitted including (but not limited to) works to the M6 and M56. In addition, the Highways Agency should clarify if all proposed works have been assessed as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment.

As discussed in February 2013, it would be helpful if the Highways Agency could clearly state within the draft Development Consent Order which aspects of the works are considered to be Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects; for example the Highways Agency may also wish to consider whether the works to the M56 fall within section 22 of the PA 2008. Please also note, the application form requests that the associated development is indicated in box 7.

28 March 2013
Highways Agency
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please see the correspondance from Mrs Needham attached
Please see the Planning Inspectorate's response attached

06 March 2013
Mrs Needham
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Please see correspondence from Dr Ballardie attached
Please see the Planning Inspectorate's response attached

04 March 2013
Dr Ballardie
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
To discuss the draft Development Consent Order and Explanatory Memorandum for the A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Scheme
Please see attachments.

21 February 2013
Highways Agency
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
With regards adequate public consultation.Please see attachment.
Please see attachment.

22 January 2013
Jean and Lionel Duncalf
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please see attachment
Please see attachment

30 November 2012
J Edwards
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please see attachment
Please see attachment

30 November 2012
Peter Marsland
Enquiry received via email
A letter was received from Ms Robinson asking for clarification on the initial work undertaken by the Highways Agency on the A665 Lobby Group's alternative Junction 20 option, with the following information attached:

A letter from the Highways Agency dated 5 November 2012
The Highways Agency M6 Junction 20 Improvement: Traffic Appraisal July 2012
Two maps extracted from Figure 1 of CBO Transport?s Report.
The following advice was provided:

Thank you for your letter received on 15 November 2012 regarding the above proposal with the following information enclosed:
A letter from the Highways Agency dated 5 November 2012
The Highways Agency M6 Junction 20 Improvement: Traffic Appraisal July 2012
Two maps extracted from Figure 1 of CBO Transport?s Report.

We have also been copied into an email from Matt Parkinson of the A556 Lobby Group to Anna Pickering of the Highways Agency dated 12 November 2012 and an email response from Anna Pickering to Matt Parkinson dated 13 November 2012.

We therefore note that you have liaised directly with the Highways Agency on this matter and that Matt Parkinson had also copied Cheshire East Council into his correspondence. We will keep all above correspondence on file and it will be made available to the relevant Inspector(s) once the application is submitted.

Your letter raises your concerns that the Highways Agency ?have no intention of properly assessing (the).. alternative? put forward by the A556 Lobby Group and CBO Transport.

Applicants for nationally significant infrastructure projects are under a duty to take account of responses to consultation and publicity in accordance with section 49 of the Planning Act 2008. Section 49(2) states that ?The applicant must, when deciding whether the application that the applicant is actually to make should be in the same terms as the proposed application, have regard to any relevant responses?. A relevant response is a response to the applicant?s statutory consultation which is received by the applicant?s deadline, in response to consultation and publicity undertaken under sections 42, 47 and 48 of the Planning Act 2008.

Applicants must produce a consultation report to submit with their application. This report will include; details of the process undertaken in compliance with sections 42, 47 and 48 (consultation and publicity on their proposal), any relevant responses submitted to the applicant, and the account taken of any relevant responses. Therefore if the A556 Lobby Group?s comments and suggested option was submitted in response to the above consultation and publicity, the Highways Agency is under a duty to take account of this. The Planning Inspectorate advises applicants to also include in their consultation report, details of any non-statutory consultation and publicity undertaken and the account taken of the responses.

In addition to the above, the applicant will produce an Environmental Statement as part of their application. The Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2009 (as amended) require the Environmental Statement to include an outline of the main alternatives studied by the applicant and an indication of the main reasons for the applicant?s choice, taking into account the environmental effects.

Once an application is submitted, within 28 days a decision must be made as to whether it can be accepted for examination. An application will only be accepted if it is concluded that (amongst other criteria) the applicant has, in relation to a proposed application that has become the application, complied with Chapter 2 of Part 5 (pre-application procedure) of the Planning Act 2008. In order to make this decision, regard must be had to the applicant?s consultation report, any adequacy of consultation representation received from a local authority consultee and the extent to which the applicant has had regard to any guidance issued by the Secretary of State.

As you are already aware, if the application is accepted for examination, you will have the opportunity to register as an interested party, to participate in the examination.

You have asked for help and advice in your letter and I hope that the above explanation of the process informs you of the applicant?s obligations and the checks which are undertaken once an application is submitted. I have also copied this letter to the Highways Agency and Cheshire East Council for their information.

Where your concerns remain, we advise you to continue to liaise with the Highways Agency and Cheshire East Council and copy the Planning Inspectorate into the correspondence if you wish.

23 November 2012
Lorraine Robinson
Enquiry received via phone
Ms Robinson called and requested information relating statutory consultation that developers must undertake under section 42 of the Planning Act 2008.
Ms Robinson was advised of the statutory duty on developers at the pre-application stage and their duty to take account of responses to consultation and publicity under s49 of the Planning Act 2008. Advice was also given on how to submit a relevant representation.

29 October 2012
Lorraine Robinson
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Mr Parkinson sent the following email to the Planning Inspectorate:

I am emailing you about an anomaly which came to my attention earlier this week regarding the Highway Agency's reporting of progression of their scheme for a bypass for the A556 in Cheshire; the 'Knutsford to Bowdon "Environmental Improvement" Scheme'.

On 20th July 2012 the HA sent out letters to the 700 individuals who responded to their consultation process, which ended on 16th April, updating us on progress. In that letter they state, and I quote :

"We will be undertaking further work on assessing alternatives such as M6/J20 improvements during the next few months. We will publish more information about our findings in the Consultation Report. In the meantime we are maintaining progress on developing the A556 scheme".

As you can imagine this brought about a certain degree of hope that the A556 Lobby Groups professionally produced report into delivering a cost-effective alternative to the bypass (ie. M6 junction 20 improvements) would be looked at and considered carefully by the Highways Agency - as they are statutory bound to do so.

However in a statement to Knutsford.com earlier this week they said, and I quote:

"We did receive an alternative scheme proposal, but we are not planning to progress this as an option, as our assessment is that it would not deliver value for money, and would result in more traffic on local lanes in rural communities. Our consultation report will include our detailed response on this too." Article here: [attachment 1]

This seems at best contradictory and at worst means that they have already written off our proposals without appearing to have taken any appropriate level of response time to examine them properly and thoroughly. Our alternative scheme could potentially save taxpayers over £100M, without taking anywhere near as much greenbelt land, destroying the environment for endangered species or disrupting the lives and businesses of hundreds of people. It also seems that they are telling seven hundred people one thing whilst in fact they have already decided the bypass is going ahead, which makes a complete mockery of the entire 'consultation' process.

As a committee member of the A556 Lobby Group, I look forward to hearing from you in due course about this.
The Planning Inspectorate sent the following advice:

Your correspondence will remain on file and will be made available to the Inspector once the application is submitted to the Planning Inspectorate.

In the meantime you may wish to contact the Highways Agency directly during this pre-application stage to inform them of your comments. The Planning Act 2008 regime is a frontloaded process, therefore if you have comments to make, direct contact with the applicant prior to submission of their application is advised.

As you may be aware, the Infrastructure Planning Commission has been abolished and its functions and staff have transferred to the Planning Inspectorate. Our advice notes have been re-branded and some alterations have been made in light of changes brought by the Localism Act 2011, I have included a link to our advice notes for your information:
[attachment 2]

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact us.

13 August 2012
Mr Parkinson
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
I, Amanda Logan, wish to be registered as an itnerested party regarding the A556 proposed development.

I also wish to raise the following concerns regarding this development:

1) I feel this has been an unfair consultation for several reasons. Firstly the summary documents posted through to my home address were misleading and did not contain enough detail for an adequate decision to be made based on the documents received. Secondly, it was impossible for me to view the maps and documents at Little Bollington School in the time that they were available there ((Tuesday 31st January), as I am a working mother with a young child who I have to see to in the evening.

2)I have not been consulted previously about my opinions regarding the choice of routes and neither have any of my neighbours, so the statement of " preferred route " as a result of "feedback from local residents" is not accurate.

3) I have significant concerns which I am happy to elaborate on regarding the safety in the lanes both in Millington, where the lanes are very narrow, and on the Lymm Road, which is narrow and dangerous
near the exit of Spode Green Lane. At this point, cars are often speeding and the nearby corner is a common accident spot.

4)I also have grave concerns about the safety of any horse riders who hack out from Brook Farm along the Lymm Road, who use the Millington Lanes for exercising horses or try to cross the Lymm Road to reach the Trans Penine Railway. This will make their access much more dangerous and I feel this goes against the policies for promoting outdoor sport and recreation.

I am happy to send through a more detailed letter to follow this and am submitting this e-mail as evidence of my concerns and disappointment in lack of consultation so far.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency undertook consultation recently and the deadline for submitting comments to the Highways Agency on this proposal was 16 April 2012. I am unsure as to whether you have responded directly to the Highways Agency with your comments within their deadline, if not you may wish to send them your comments.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this area. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation
form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 1]
[attachment 1]

?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 3]
[attachment 3]

19 April 2012
Amanda Logan
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Iam writing this letter in connection of the proposed by pass of the A556 .Would like to draw your attention to some of the following points.
? I wish to be registered as an interested party
? The summery document (SD) was extremely misleading in several aspects diagrams illustrate all Mere properties but do not acknowledge the homes to the west of the road.
? H A stated that they would be contacting land owners and their representatives in advance of the public consultation. The principle landowners in Millington whose land will be most severely affected have only recently been approached.
? A model of the proposed road should have been made to enable local people to visualise the devastating effect it would have on local communities, business and people?s lives.
? How can you say the road is going to transform people lives by being environmentally friendly when you can?t stop car pollution, accidents can happen on any road.
? Too expensive, we have a 556 already work with the one you have don?t just put it in the middle of fields.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency undertook consultation recently and the deadline for submitting comments to the Highways Agency on this proposal was 16 April 2012. I am unsure as to whether you have responded directly to the Highways Agency with your comments within their deadline, if not you may wish to send them your comments.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this area. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation
form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 1]
[attachment 1]

Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 3]
[attachment 3]

19 April 2012
Ann Hartley
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
The Consultation process on this proposal concludes to day.

I am a resident who is impacted by the current state of play and have completed my Consultation form and returned to the Highways Agency.

I am extremely concerned over the objectors to the proposed bypass comments which are without basis and fact.

The proposed solution has been thoroughly researched by the Highways Agency and they have included differing options as mitigation proposals within their consultation. The Highways Agency have been extremely effective in their communication process throughout this planning cycle.

Unfortunately, what we have is a group of objectors "hell bent" on ignoring the facts. The Highways Agency have spent tens of thousands of taxpayers money researching and deliberating on what viable solutions are available to improve the A556. This is a process that has gone on for decades. They have now brought forward their deliberations which are credible and provide the most effective solution to resolving the issues with the A556. I fail to understand how the objectors can campaign against these proposals as they are based on fact.

My purpose in writing is to make you aware that not only have The Parish Council, The Local Authority and The Highways Agency backed these proposals but the residents and commuters alike, people who are directly impacted by the problems with this road and who have advocated a solution for many many years and wish to ensure that our voice is heard and not just that of very vocal objectors.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) places upon them. I am unsure as to whether you have responded directly to the Highways Agency with your comments; you may wish to do so and as you are aware, the Highways Agency consultation closes today.

As your letter raises points regarding the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this area. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 1]

?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 2]

16 April 2012
Myke Gallacher
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please find attached a letter expressing my concerns about the A556 'Environmental Improvement Scheme'.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) places upon them and I note that you have copied the Highways Agency, The Rt Hon George Osborne MP, The Secretary of State for Transport and The Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs into your correspondence.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this area. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation
form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 1]
<[attachment 2];

?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 3]
[attachment 3]

16 April 2012
Rachel Harrex
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
I would like to register my objection to the proposed improvement to the A556. I am a regular visitor to the North West having lived in the area for several years and having many friends in the area.

When I learned about the proposals recently via some friends in the Millington area, I was particularly concerned about how this supposed environmental improvement would have a significant detrimental effect on what remains of the green belt countryside in the area of the proposed new road (oddly many friends in Bowdon were not aware of the proposals at all, making me concerned about how widely these changes have been publicised).

I am a regular user of some of the narrow country lanes in the area for example Peacock and Chapel Lanes which will without a doubt become "rat runs" between the link road and local communities with a real risk of serious accidents as these lanes will not be able to cope with the increased volume of traffic.

As someone who drives from the South to the North West regularly as stated earlier, I really can't believe why an improvement to the M6 junction 20 was ruled out - this would limit the damage to the countryside.

Once this countryside is lost, it is lost forever, and to do so for the sake of improving the lives of a few residents on the current road but with major impact on the countryside and small communities along the proposed route of the new road is, in my view, unreasonable.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

Please note that the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) was abolished and on 1 April 2012 the functions were transferred to The Planning Inspectorate. I was the Case Manager for the proposal whilst at the IPC and I remain as the Case Manager within The Planning Inspectorate.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) places upon them. I am unsure as to whether you have responded directly to the Highways Agency with your comments, you may wish to send your comments to the Highways Agency because they will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]

Please note, the Highways Agency consultation closes today.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 2]

?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 3]

16 April 2012
Jill Harris
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
I am writing to express my concern regarding several issues about the proposed road improvements of the A556 Knutsford-Bowdon route in Cheshire.

Firstly, please could you register me as an interested party, and keep me up-to-date with any progress or relevant information regarding this issue.

I write as a local resident to strongly object to the current proposals regarding the A556.

As a family which will be hugely affected on a daily basis by these changes, we urge you to listen to the opinions of local people. These changes affect our homes, and our ability to travel to and from our local amenities, neighbours and friends. The proposed road is not just a coloured line on a map to us ? it is set to disrupt our lives in many ways.

I attended the Parish Council meetings in 2011 (Millington and High Legh), and there was clearly fierce opposition to the proposals, especially the junction at Millington.

Keep the motorway traffic on the motorway network!

Firstly, we are opposed, along with many local people, to the idea that the new A556 route should be the answer to what is essentially a motorway traffic problem. Our understanding from Mr Jeremy Bloom is that the Junction 20 option was looked at some years ago, but deemed not viable due to the cost. In today?s terms, what is the cost of this option, compared with the building of a new A556 road? Also, surely some considerable weight must be given to minimising the impact on local residents. Improving junction 20 offers an opportunity to keep motorway traffic on the motorway network, AND minimise the impact on local communities. Surely this is a better option than another dual carriageway, carrying motorway traffic!

With some simple measures such as reducing the current A556 down to 2 lanes, reduced speeds on the A556, changes in signing etc, then most motorway traffic could be kept on the motorway network.

This iis by far the most sensible option and least disruption.

If there is a bypass...

With regards to the options 0, 1, 2 and 3 which are now being proposed by the Highways Agency, why is there no simple bypass option? This was clearly voiced as a favourite at meetings between local residents and the Highways Agency representatives, in the event that the new A556 road does go ahead.

The bypass could simply be just that. A bypass between the M56 and M6. Bridges and underpasses could be provided to keep local roads open. The current A556 could remain open, at reduced speeds, allowing access to the M56 and M6 for local residents. This would mean that no additional junctions are needed.

We are being told that the current junction options are for our benefit. If this is so, then why not provide the option that many local residents were asking for? This would hugely reduce the negative impact on local communities, whilst still keeping the M6 to M56 traffic on the new bypass. Instead of dividing opinion with so many options, surely it makes sense to look for an option which would benefit the majority of local residents, but still allow for the main objective of the road to be achieved.

Many people I have spoken to have found the series of options 0-3 in the current proposals both misleading, and unnecessarily complex. The Summary document itself, that was provided to people to put down their final opinions on the road and preferred routes, was incorrect - i noticed many properties were omitted from the maps in the brochure. Those looking at the options (in particular those that are not local to the area) are therefore not given the full information and are misled to believe that options such as option 0, with the Millington junction, will not affect anyone?s home. The result is a questionaire that does not contain the full information, and therefore it should be recalled and retracted, and replaced with one that does contain the complete relevant information. There are many homes in this area, some of which only metres away from a huge junction. They are not just properties with a price tag ? we live here with our families.

In addition to the error in the questionaire/summary document, I would like to express my concern over the unexpected change to the"preferred route" baseline from 2009 to 2010. The new route contains large roundabouts at Millington and other on/off routes and options. The Highways agency said they made the change after consulting with the local residents and community groups. However, as a resident in one of the communities, i did not recieve a request for feedback, nor did anyone else i know. In fact, it seems that noone in Millington, High Legh, Bucklow Hill, Hoo Green, Hulseheath or Tabley were consulted before this change. I would like to know who they consulted, and why the change was made, considering it was NOT based on th the feedback from ALL local communities.

I would like to express my concern over the terminology used in the literature and media by the highways agency. They have portayed the proposed works as an environmental improvement scheme. But this is far form environmental improvenemt - building a SECOND dual carriageway, next to an already exisiting one is surely not environmental. In addition, they have said that the improvements wil benefit the local communities. I would like to object strongly to that comment, and as a member of the said community, i feel I am in a position to say it will devastate our community if the road goes ahead as planned - it will cut our community apart.

Another point I would also like to raise concenrs about the Highways agency decision to make use of our local roads in their plans. They intend to direct trafifc along some of our small back roads, and out towards others villages and towns. I am sure therefore that they have not even stepped foot onto our local roads, or they would realise how dangerous and foolish this idea is. In many parts the local roads are single lane, with visibility reduced to 5/10 metres. There are many hidden corners, and other such hazards, which are hazardous now, and would be treacherous to any driver new to the area, or unfamiliar with the route. Even as someone who knows the route, safety cannot be assured because the Highways agency plans are to send drivers who do not know this route down the lanes. The projected number of users will without a doubt cause not only congestion on these very small lanes, but will almost certainly be accidents waiting to happen.

Leave the beautiful countryside in this area as it is. We use the local roads to travel to school, local shops, library and to visit friends in High Legh and Lymm. We take our daughter and her friends for walks and bike rides. Our elderly mother who lives with us also goes for regular walks. Some of the options proposed will be devastating to our community. We know that there are many factors to consider, but we urge you to put people and communities at the top of the list.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) places upon them. I am unsure as to whether you have responded directly to the Highways Agency with your comments; you may wish to send your comments to the Highways Agency because they will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]
Please note, the Highways Agency consultation closes today.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this area. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 2]

?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 3]

16 April 2012
Nichola Dunne-Hanif
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
I wish to formally raise my objections and concerns with regard to this scheme under a sequence of headings. Please see attached document
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

Please note that the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) was abolished and on 1 April 2012 the functions were transferred to The Planning Inspectorate. I was the Case Manager for the proposal whilst at the IPC and I remain as the Case Manager within The Planning Inspectorate.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) places upon them. I am unsure as to whether you have responded directly to the Highways Agency with your comments; you may wish to send your comments to the Highways Agency because they will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]

Please note, the Highways Agency consultation closes today.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this area. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 2]

?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 3]

16 April 2012
Trevor Allinson
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please find attached a letter to yourself regarding the A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Environmental Improvement Scheme
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) places upon them. I am unsure as to whether you have responded directly to the Highways Agency with your comments; you may wish to do so because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. As you are aware, the Highways Agency consultation closes today.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this area. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 1]

?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 2]

16 April 2012
Diane Flanagan
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please find attached my response to the public consultation on A556 environmental improvement scheme, which details why I believe the current consultation to have been unfair and flawed, and why I believe it should be withdrawn.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

Please note that the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) was abolished and on 1 April 2012 its functions were transferred to The Planning Inspectorate. I was the Case Manager for the proposal whilst at the IPC and I remain as the Case Manager within The Planning Inspectorate.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) places upon them. I am unsure as to whether you have responded directly to the Highways Agency with your comments, you may wish to do so because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. As you are aware, the Highways Agency consultation closes today.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this area. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 1]

?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 2]

16 April 2012
Philip Martin
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, you may wish to respond to the Highways Agency consultation because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:
[attachment 1]
Please note that the Highways Agency consultation closes on 16 April 2012.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this scheme. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation? as they may be of particular interest.

13 April 2012
Philip Poulton
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached document.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, you may wish to respond to the Highways Agency consultation because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]
Please note that the Highways Agency consultation closes on 16 April 2012.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this scheme. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation? as they may be of particular interest.

13 April 2012
Matt Ravenscroft
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, you may wish to respond to the Highways Agency consultation because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]
Please note that the Highways Agency consultation closes on 16 April 2012.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this scheme. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation? as they may be of particular interest.

13 April 2012
Graham Robinson
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, you may wish to respond to the Highways Agency consultation because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]
Please note that the Highways Agency consultation closes on 16 April 2012.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this scheme. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes on the following link, also provided in my earlier e-mail to you today: [attachment 2]

13 April 2012
F W Ballardie
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
See attached email
Your comments have been noted and will remain on our file.

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, you may wish to respond to the Highways Agency consultation because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]

Please note that the Highways Agency consultation closes on 16 April 2012.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this scheme. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation. Following the submission of the application, a decision will be made within 28 days as to whether the application can be accepted for examination.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have attached links below to two advice notes which may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?
[attachment 2]

?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation?
[attachment 3]

13 April 2012
Pamela Winward
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, I would suggest that you respond to the Highways Agency consultation because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]
Please note that the Highways Agency consultation closes on 16 April 2012.

As your letter raises some points regarding the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this scheme. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation? as they may be of particular interest.

12 April 2012
Revd P J Robinson
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, you may wish to respond to the Highways Agency consultation because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]
Please note that the Highways Agency consultation closes on 16 April 2012.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this scheme. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation? as they may be of particular interest.

12 April 2012
Carol Ross
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, I would suggest that you respond to the Highways Agency because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]
Please note that the Highways Agency consultation closes on 16 April 2012.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this scheme. When the application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation? as they may be of particular interest.

12 April 2012
D Pennington
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. I note that you have copied the Highways Agency, The Rt Hon Caroline Spelman MP Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, The Rt Hon Justine Greening MP Secretary of State for Transport and the Rt Hon George Osborne MP. Responding to the Highways Agency consultation is the most appropriate action at this stage, as you have done so, because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority for this scheme. When an application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, a decision will be made, within 28 days, as to whether the application will progress to the examination stage. During this stage the local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation? as they may be of particular interest.

12 April 2012
S H Coxon
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and prescribed consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, I would suggest that responding to this consultation is the most appropriate action because the Highways Agency will be under a duty to take account of relevant responses. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]
Please note that the Highways Agency consultation closes on 16 April 2012.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority. When an application is submitted to The Planning Inspectorate, a decision will be made, within 28 days, as to whether the application will progress to the examination stage. During this stage the local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with The Planning Inspectorate and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: Responding to the developers pre-application consultation? as they may be of particular interest.

12 April 2012
Karen Potter
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
I am concerned that the proposed A556 'improvement' scheme fails on most, if not all, of the Governments five central objectives for transport to be examined through the NATA process. As you undoubtedly know these are Environmental, Safety, Economy, Accessibility and Integration. The current proposals put forward by the Highways Agency (HA) which the public are supposedly being consulted about, benefit one community to the detriment of six other hamlets and villages.

1) Environment. As the proposals stand far from being an 'environmental improvement' scheme, the road will destroy prime agricultural land, woodland listed as being of 'Special Biological Importance' (Tabley Pipe Wood), countless ponds and the habitats of endangered species. No amount of 'wildlife mitigation' can compensate for the damage and loss of precious countryside. The improvement in air quality which the HA claim the new road will bring actually only benefit the residents of Chester Rd. The new road will shift the pollution to the communities of Tabley, Hoo Green, Hulseheath, Millington, High Legh and Little Bollington. Although the HA claim that the proposed road will be a 'free-flowing' one, the fact remains that even they acknowledge traffic will back up from J7 of the M56 and into these communities. Building new roads encourages increases in car use and quantity of journeys; which does not sit easily with Government targets for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.

2) Safety. The proposed scheme causes more safety problems than it solves. The anticipated increase in vehicles using back country lanes to reach the proposed junction at Millington for example will increase from around 120 each day to between 2-3000 each day! These lanes form part of the Cheshire Cycleway and are criss-crossed with bridleways and public footpaths. In fact they are barely wide enough in places to accommodate two vehicles passing. It is inevitable that there will be serious accidents. In addition as the proposed road will have a speed limit increase of 70mph (from the current 50mph) traffic will be travelling faster into the back of the queue at J7 of the M56; once again increasing the likelihood of serious injury should there be an accident or collision.

3) Economy. The proposed road will do little to stimulate the economy other than providing short term construction jobs. The road is a replica of the current A556 minus two sets of traffic lights. It therefore does not increase capacity. The traffic will continue to queue and back up from J7 of the M56, at peak times, just as it does now. The proposed road will negatively impact the livelihoods of farming communities and agricultural businesses, particularly in Tabley and Millington. It is likely that some will struggle to keep going and vulnerable rural communities will suffer job losses at a time when they are already under increased pressure to stay financially afloat.

4) Accessibility. The proposed road will further isolate the hamlet of Millington. Access for emergency response vehicles will be hindered, particularly for Millington Hall Lane. Far from increasing connectivity, new roads divide and sever communities from one another and once again, increase dependence on the car. Communities that were once relatively safe for children to play in become unsafe, parents keep their children inside and this all results in a reduction in quality of life and a loss 'community', which has implications for other social factors such as crime and anti-social behaviour.

5) Integration. For a start the proposed scheme is against the Governments own policy on freight transport of a shift toward rail. It also makes vehicles travelling between two motorways, leave the motorway network, join an A road, then re-join the motorway network, rather than remain on the motorway. Improvements to Junction 20 of the M6 are the only logical, long-term solution to keeping traffic on the motorway network, (where it belongs) and would be advantageous to everyone living alongside the current A556. Improving J20 would be a true environmental improvement, it would benefit all communities (the current A556 could still be de-trunked), it would not result in communities being severed and torn apart, quality of life would not be destroyed and improving J20 would be SUSTAINABLE, in a way which the current proposals are absolutely not.
See attached response.

10 April 2012
Matt Parkinson
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is at the pre-application stage of the process and the Highways Agency is currently undertaking consultation and publicity on the scheme. At this stage you are advised to provide your comments about the proposal directly to the Highways Agency as they have a duty to take account of relevant responses to their consultation and publicity.

Once the application is submitted to the Planning Inspectorate and if it is accepted for examination, you will have the opportunity to register as an interested party to be involved in the examination. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

To confirm, we are currently unable to process your request to speak at a hearing, however you will have the opportunity to make this request at a later date if you register as an interested party.

I have enclosed two Advice Notes for your information. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at the address or email provided.

05 April 2012
Walter Wright
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process, at this stage the National Infrastructure Directorate (NID) is unable to process or respond to comments. This ensures the impartiality of the NID and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the NID during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted.

As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, I would suggest that engaging in this consultation is the most appropriate action. Their project website can be accessed via the following link: [attachment 1]

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority. When an application is submitted to the IPC (following the pre-application stage), we have a 28 day period during which a Commissioner will decide whether to accept the application to progress to the examination stage. During this time we will invite relevant local authorities to provide us with their comments on the adequacy of the promoter?s consultation.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and on site notices. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

We received a letter from the Highways Agency dated 29 February 2012 informing us of amendments made to their Consultation Summary Document, showing the correct locations of cuttings and embankments. I understand that this may clarify some of the points raised in your letter.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes.

A link to the relevant section of our website is provided below. At the pre-application stage ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? may be of particular interest.

[attachment 2]
Furthermore as of 1 April 2012, as part of the Localism Act, the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) will be abolished and a new National Infrastructure Directorate will be created within the Planning Inspectorate, an agency of the Department for Communities and Local Government.

The move to the Planning Inspectorate will be seamless and the examination of applications for major infrastructure projects will not be delayed. You should however note that as from 1 April 2012 any correspondence about major infrastructure projects will be addressed from the National Infrastructure Directorate, Planning Inspectorate.

02 April 2012
A Ryan
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process, at this stage the IPC is unable to process or respond to comments. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted.

As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and statutory consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, I would suggest that engaging in this consultation is the most appropriate action.

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority. When an application is submitted to the IPC (following the pre-application stage), a decision will be made, within 28 days, as to whether the application will progress to the examination stage. During this stage the local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and on site notices. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? as this may be of particular interest.

I have also enclosed a note regarding the abolition of the IPC and transfer of its functions to the Planning Inspectorate.

26 March 2012
David and Linda Kennerley
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Correspondence from Mr M Parkinson regarding the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon scheme, see below.
Response to Mr M Parkinson, see below.

26 March 2012
Mr M Parkinson
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process, at this stage the IPC is unable to process or respond to comments. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted and I acknowledge that you have copied the same correspondence to The Highways Agency, The Rt Hon George Osborne MP, Ms J Greening The Secretary of State for Transport, and Ms C Spelman The Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural affairs.

As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and statutory consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, I would suggest that engaging in this consultation is the most appropriate action. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority. When an application is submitted to the IPC (following the pre-application stage), a decision will be made within 28 days, as to whether the application will progress to the examination stage. During this stage the local authority consultees will be invited to provide their comments on the adequacy of the developer?s consultation.

If the application is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and on site notices. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? as this may be of particular interest.

I have also enclosed a leaflet regarding the abolition of the IPC and transfer of its functions to the Planning Inspectorate. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at the address or email provided.

22 March 2012
C A Baines
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process, at this stage the IPC is unable to process or respond to comments. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted and I acknowledge that you have copied the same correspondence to The Rt Hon George Osborne MP, Jeremy Bloom at the Highways Agency, Ms J Greening The Secretary of State for Transport, and Ms C Spelman The Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities and statutory consultees on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, I would suggest that engaging in this consultation is the most appropriate action. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:
[attachment 1]

Once the application is submitted to the IPC and if it is accepted for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Please note that you are unable to register as an interested party during the current (pre-application) stage of the process for this proposal.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. I have enclosed ?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? as this may be of particular interest.

22 March 2012
Nigel and Christine Packer
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Correspondence from TP Burgess dated 6 March 2012 regarding the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon scheme, see below.
Response to TP Burgess see below.

22 March 2012
TP Burgess
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
See attached letter.
The proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Scheme is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process.

As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, I would suggest that engaging in this consultation is the most appropriate action. Their project website can be accessed via the following link:

[attachment 1]

As your letter raises concerns with the consultation being carried out you may also wish to send a copy of your correspondence to the relevant local authority. When an application is submitted to the IPC (following the pre-application stage), we have a 28 day period during which a Commissioner will decide whether to accept the application to progress to the examination stage. During this time we will invite relevant local authorities to provide us with their comments on the adequacy of the promoter?s consultation.

If, following submission of the application, the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be an opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage

For further information on the IPC and the specifics of the process which is to be followed you may wish to read advice that we have published. All of our advice is available via our website at www.infrastructure.independent.gov.uk.

At this stage I would suggest reading the enclosed advice notes, namely 8.1 (how the process works), 8.2 (how to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal) and 8.5 (The examination process) which will provide you with further information pertaining to your query.

Furthermore as of 1 April 2012, as part of the Localism Act, the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) will be abolished and a new National Infrastructure Directorate will be created within the Planning Inspectorate, an agency of the Department for Communities and Local Government.

The move to the Planning Inspectorate will be seamless and the examination of applications for major infrastructure projects will not be delayed. You should however note that as from 1 April 2012 any correspondence about major infrastructure projects will be addressed from the National Infrastructure Directorate, Planning Inspectorate. Further information regarding transition arrangements can be found in the leaflet enclosed.

15 March 2012
J J Mellor
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Letter from Lorraine Robinson regarding the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon scheme, see below.
Response to Lorraine Robinson, see below.

15 March 2012
Lorraine Robinson
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Letter from Danny and Mandy McNicholl dated 24 February 2012 regarding the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon scheme, see letter below.
Response to Danny and Mandy McNicholl, see below.

13 March 2012
Danny and Mandy McNicholl
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Letter from H P Clough regarding the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Scheme, see letter below.
Response to H P Clough, see letter below.

13 March 2012
H P Clough
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please kindly register me as an interested party in the above and confirm accordingly.
Please be advised that as the project has not yet been submitted, the period to register as an Interested Party has not yet opened. Only once an application has been submitted and accepted to go forward to examination will members of the public and organisations be able to register.

The proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowden Scheme is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. As you are aware the Highways Agency is currently consulting with local communities on their proposal in accordance with the duties which the Planning Act 2008 places upon them. At this stage, I would suggest that engaging in this consultation is the most appropriate action. Their project website can be accessed via the following link: [attachment 1]

If, following submission of the application, the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be an opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

The Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) aims to run an inclusive examination process and we would encourage anyone with an interest in a project to register at the relevant time as an interested party. This allows individuals or groups to participate fully in the examination process. Under the Planning Act 2008 it is for the developer to decide when the period to register as an interested party starts and ends, but they must allow at least 28 days for people to make their relevant representations.

For further information on the IPC and the specifics of the process which is to be followed you may wish to read advice that we have published. All of our advice is available via our website at www.infrastructure.independent.gov.uk.

At this stage I would suggest reading the attached advice notes, namely 8.1 (how the process works), 8.2 (how to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal) and 8.5 (The examination process) which will provide you with further information pertaining to your query.

Additionally, should the application be accepted for examination, the IPC will at this point establish a dedicated Twitter news feed for the project. This would inform you of all major application milestones, such as information regarding relevant representations, at the appropriate times. Finally the IPC would arrange a number of events in the local community to inform people how to register as an interested party. These events will be publicised in the local press, through posters displayed locally and on our website. I trust this response is helpful. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to call our helpline.

Furthermore as of 1 April 2012, as part of the Localism Act, the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) will be abolished and a new National Infrastructure Directorate will be created within the Planning Inspectorate, an agency of the Department for Communities and Local Government.

The move to the Planning Inspectorate will be seamless and the examination of applications for major infrastructure projects will not be delayed. You should however note that as from 1 April 2012 any correspondence about major infrastructure projects will be addressed from the National Infrastructure Directorate, Planning Inspectorate. Please find attached hereto a ?flyer? detailing the IPC?s move to the Planning Inspectorate.

08 March 2012
Henry Brooks
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please find attached my most recent letter of objection which strongly opposes the proposed A556 bypass
The proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowden Scheme is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process.

The Highways Agency has recently commenced consultation on their proposals in accordance with the duties which the PA 2008 places upon them. As the PA 2008 process is frontloaded, we suggest that you engage in their consultation at this stage. Their project website can be accessed at the following link ? [attachment 1]

If, following submission of the application, the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be an opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. At this stage I would suggest reading the attached advice notes, namely 8.1 (how the process works), 8.2 (how to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal) and 8.5 (The examination process) which will provide you with further information on the IPC process. You may also wish to visit our website to view further advice and guidance on the process, on the following link: [attachment 2]
Furthermore as of 1 April 2012, as part of the Localism Act, the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) will be abolished and a new National Infrastructure Directorate will be created within the Planning Inspectorate, an agency of the Department for Communities and Local Government.

The move to the Planning Inspectorate will be seamless and the examination of applications for major infrastructure projects will not be delayed. You should however note that as from 1 April 2012 any correspondence about major infrastructure projects will be addressed from the National Infrastructure Directorate, Planning Inspectorate.

If you have any questions about this or major infrastructure projects please contact our office.

08 March 2012
Liz Needham
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Please could you review the contents of the attachment and if you feel there is a valid point for the Highways Agency to take into consideration please could you ensure that they act accordingly. The same letter has been sent to Jeremy Bloom at the Highways Agency and clearly it is he I would expect a full response from.
The proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowden Scheme is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process.

I note in your email to us that you have contacted Mr. Jeremy Bloom at the Highways Agency. It should be noted that the Highways Agency has recently commenced consultation on their proposals in accordance with the duties which the PA 2008 places upon them. As the PA 2008 process is frontloaded, you may wish to engage with their consultation at this stage. Their project website can be accessed at the following link ? [attachment 1]

If, following submission of the application, the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be an opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. At this stage I would suggest reading the attached advice notes, namely 8.1 (how the process works), 8.2 (how to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal) and 8.5 (The examination process) which will provide you with further information on the IPC process. You may also wish to visit our website to view further advice and guidance on the process, on the following link:

[attachment 2]
Furthermore as of 1 April 2012, as part of the Localism Act, the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) will be abolished and a new National Infrastructure Directorate will be created within the Planning Inspectorate, an agency of the Department for Communities and Local Government. The move to the Planning Inspectorate will be seamless and the examination of applications for major infrastructure projects will not be delayed. You should however note that as from 1 April 2012 any correspondence about major infrastructure projects will be addressed from the National Infrastructure Directorate, Planning Inspectorate.

Please find attached hereto a ?flyer? detailing the IPC?s move to the Planning Inspectorate.

08 March 2012
Chris Matthews
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Letter from CBO Transport regarding the A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Proposal, see below.
Response to CBO Transport, see below.

07 March 2012
CBO Transport Paul Corbett
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
I write as a local resident to strongly object to the current proposals regarding the A556.

As a family which will be hugely affected on a daily basis by these changes, we urge you to listen to the opinions of local people. These changes affect our homes, and our ability to travel to and from our local amenities, neighbours and friends. The proposed road is not just a coloured line on a map to us ? it is set to disrupt our lives in many ways.

I attended the Parish Council meetings in 2011 (Millington and High Legh), and there was clearly fierce opposition to the proposals, especially the junction at Millington.

Keep the motorway traffic on the motorway network!

Firstly, we are opposed, along with many local people, to the idea that the new A556 route should be the answer to what is essentially a motorway traffic problem. Our understanding from the Highways Agency is that the Jct 20 option was looked at some years ago, but deemed not viable due to the cost. In today?s terms, what is the cost of this option, compared with the building of a new A556 road? Also, surely some considerable weight must be given to minimising the impact on local residents. Improving junction 20 offers an opportunity to keep motorway traffic on the motorway network, AND minimise the impact on local communities. Surely this is a better option than another dual carriageway, carrying motorway traffic!

With some measures such as improving Jct 20, reducing the current A556 down to 2 lanes, reduced speeds on the A556, changes in signing etc, then most motorway traffic could be kept on the motorway network.

Also, see attached a copy of the joint NW TAR / CPRE letter, which raises serious issues surrounding why the Jct 20 improvement option was dropped and deemed too costly.

We request that the agencies involved look to improving the motorway network at Jct 20 of the M6 and Jct 9 of the M56, to allow motorway drivers to stay on a motorway therefore allowing them to maintain motorway speeds to reduce time by avoiding local traffic and delays on their travels.

If there is a bypass...

With regards to the options 0, 1, 2 and 3 which are now being proposed by the Highways Agency, why is there no simple bypass option? This was clearly voiced as a favourite at meetings between local residents and the Highways Agency representatives, in the event that the new A556 road does go ahead.

The bypass could simply be just that. A bypass between the M56 and M6. Bridges and underpasses could be provided to keep local roads open. The current A556 could remain open, at reduced speeds, allowing access to the M56 and M6 for local residents. This would mean that no additional junctions are needed.

We are being told that the current junction options are for our benefit. If this is so, then why not provide the option that many local residents were asking for? This would hugely reduce the negative impact on local communities, whilst still keeping the M6 to M56 traffic on the new bypass. Instead of dividing opinion with so many options, surely it makes sense to look for an option which would benefit the majority of local residents, but still allow for the main objective of the road to be achieved.

Many people I have spoken to have found the series of options 0-3 in the current proposals both misleading, and unnecessarily complex. Many properties were omitted from the maps in the brochure. Those looking at the proposals are misled to believe that some options, such as option 0 with the Millington junction, will not affect anyone?s home. There are many homes in this area, some of which only metres away from a huge junction. They are not just properties with a price tag ? we live here with our families.

We urge you to consider the improvement to the motorway network as the clear, permanent solution.

Leave the beautiful countryside in this area as it is. We use the local roads to travel to school, local shops and library and to visit friends in High Legh and Lymm. We take our daughter and her friends for walks and bike rides. Our elderly mother who lives with us also goes for regular walks. Some of the options proposed will be devastating to our community. We know that there are many factors to consider, but we urge you to put people and communities at the top of the list.
The proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowden Scheme is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process.

The Highways Agency has recently commenced consultation on their proposals in accordance with the duties which the PA 2008 places upon them. As the PA 2008 process is frontloaded, you may wish to engage with their consultation at this stage. Their project website can be accessed at the following link ? [attachment 1]

If, following submission of the application, the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be an opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. Please find attached hereto a copy of Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal. You may also wish to visit our website to view further advice and guidance on the process, on the following link:

[attachment 2]
As of 1 April 2012, as part of the Localism Act, the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) will be abolished and a new National Infrastructure Directorate will be created within the Planning Inspectorate, an agency of the Department for Communities and Local Government. The move to the Planning Inspectorate will be seamless and the examination of applications for major infrastructure projects will not be delayed. You should however note that as from 1 April 2012 any correspondence about major infrastructure projects will be addressed from the National Infrastructure Directorate, Planning Inspectorate. Further information regarding transition arrangement when the IPC is abolished and its functions transfer, is attached hereto.

If you have any queries regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact our office.

06 March 2012
Nichola Dunne-Hanif
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Letter from Mrs J A Popley regarding the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon proposal. See letter below.
See response below.

27 February 2012
J A Popley
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Letter from Howard Clough regarding the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Proposal. See letter below.
See response below.

27 February 2012
Howard Clough
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Letter regarding proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon proposal. See attached letter.
See attached response.

27 February 2012
Michael Herrieven
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Letter from Bridget Gill dated 30 January 2012 regarding the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Scheme. See letter below.
Infrastructure Planning Commission responded on 7 February 2012. See letter below.

07 February 2012
Bridget Gill
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
An email from Andrew Simpkin reqesting details of the contact person at the IPC and how to register as an Interested Party for the Knutsford to Bowdon Roads Improvement proposal. The IPC were also copied into Mr Simpkins correspondence with the Highways Agency.
The following advice was given:

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted.

During the pre-application stage the developer will be statutorily obliged to consult the local community and statutory bodies, including local authorities; the developer has yet to commence this statutory consultation for this proposal under the PA 2008. In addition to providing your comments to the developer at this stage you may also wish to copy them to the relevant local authorities for this proposal.

When an application is submitted to the IPC we will have a 28 day period during which a Commissioner will decide whether or not to accept the application to progress to the examination stage. During this time we will invite relevant local authorities to provide us with their comments on the adequacy of the promoter?s consultation.

If the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be an opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register as in interested party will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

For further information on the IPC and the specifics of the process which is to be followed you may wish to read advice that we have published. All of our advice is available via the following link - [attachment 1] - and at this stage I would suggest reading advice notes 8.1 (how the process works) and 8.2 (how to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal).

24 November 2011
Andrew Simpkin
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
A letter from Lorraine Robinson requesting the IPCs comments on Ms Robinson's letter to the Rt Hon George Osbourne MP, regarding her thoughts on the Knutsford to Bowdon Roads Improvement proposal.
The following advice was given:

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted.

During the pre-application stage the developer will be statutorily obliged to consult the local community and statutory bodies, including local authorities; the developer has yet to commence this statutory consultation for this proposal. In addition to providing your comments to the developer at this stage you may also wish to copy them to the relevant local authorities for this proposal.

Once the application is submitted (following the pre-application stage), the IPC will invite local authority consultees to submit an adequacy of consultation representation detailing whether the developer complied with their consultation duties in accordance with the PA 2008. We do this as part of the checks the IPC carries out to determine whether or not we can accept the application for examination. In deciding whether or not to accept an application the IPC must, amongst other matters, have regard to any adequacy of consultation representation received by it from a local authority consultee.

If the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our
advice notes. A link to the relevant section of our website is provided below. At the pre-application stage ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? may be of particular interest.

[attachment 1]

18 November 2011
Lorraine Robinson
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
A letter from Mrs Popley with an attached letter from Mrs Popley to the Rt Hon Justine Greening MP, stating her throughts on the Knutsford to Bowdon Roads Improvement proposal.
The following advice was given:

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted.

During the pre-application stage the developer will be statutorily obliged to consult the local community and statutory bodies, including local authorities; the developer has yet to commence this statutory consultation for this proposal. In addition to providing your comments to the developer at this stage you may also wish to copy them to the relevant local authorities for this proposal.

Once the application is submitted (following the pre-application stage), the IPC will invite local authority consultees to submit an adequacy of consultation representation detailing whether the developer complied with their consultation duties in accordance with the PA 2008. We do this as part of the checks the IPC carries out to determine whether or not we can accept the application for examination. In deciding whether or not to accept an application the IPC must, amongst other matters, have regard to any adequacy of consultation representation received by it from a local authority consultee.

If the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. A link to the relevant section of our website is provided below. At the pre-application stage ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? may be of particular interest.

[attachment 1]

18 November 2011
Mrs Popley
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Email from Ms Bader requesting a response from the IPC regarding a letter from Ms Bader and Mr Butterworth to the Rt Hon George Osbourne MP including their thoughts on the Knutsford to Bowdon Roads Improvement proposal.
The following advice was given:
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted.

During the pre-application stage the developer will be statutorily obliged to consult the local community and statutory bodies, including local authorities; the developer has yet to commence this statutory consultation for this proposal. In addition to providing your comments to the developer at this stage you may also wish to copy them to the relevant local authorities for this proposal.

Once the application is submitted (following the pre-application stage), the IPC will invite local authority consultees to submit an adequacy of consultation representation detailing whether the developer complied with their consultation duties in accordance with the PA 2008. We do this as part of the checks the IPC carries out to determine whether or not we can accept the application for examination. In deciding whether or not to accept an application the IPC must, amongst other matters, have regard to any adequacy of consultation representation received by it from a local authority consultee.

If the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. At the pre-application stage the following advice notes may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?

[attachment 1]

?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? may be of particular interest.

[attachment 2]

28 October 2011
Ms Bader and Mr Butterworth
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Email from Mr and Mrs Buckett, attaching their correspondence to the Rt Hon George Osbourne MP regarding their thoughts on the Knutsford to Bowdon Roads Improvement Proposal.
The following advice was given:

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted.

During the pre-application stage the developer will be statutorily obliged to consult the local community and statutory bodies, including local authorities; the developer has yet to commence this statutory consultation for this proposal. In addition to providing your comments to the developer at this stage you may also wish to copy them to the relevant local authorities for this proposal.

Once the application is submitted (following the pre-application stage), the IPC will invite local authority consultees to submit an adequacy of consultation representation detailing whether the developer complied with their consultation duties in accordance with the PA 2008. We do this as part of the checks the IPC carries out to determine whether or not we can accept the application for examination. In deciding whether or not to accept an application the IPC must, amongst other matters, have regard to any adequacy of consultation representation received by it from a local authority consultee.

If the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. At the pre-application stage the following advice notes may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?

[attachment 1]

?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? may be of particular interest.

[attachment 2]

28 October 2011
Mr and Mrs Buckett
Enquiry received via phone
response has attachments
A letter from Mr and Mrs W Anderton was sent to the IPC containing their thoughts on the Knutsford to Bowdon Roads Improvement Scheme.
The following advice was given:
This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted.

During the pre-application stage the developer will be statutorily obliged to consult the local community and statutory bodies, including local authorities; the developer has yet to commence this statutory consultation for this proposal. In addition to providing your comments to the developer at this stage you may also wish to copy them to the relevant local authorities for this proposal.

Once the application is submitted (following the pre-application stage), the IPC will invite local authority consultees to submit an adequacy of consultation representation detailing whether the developer complied with their consultation duties in accordance with the PA 2008. We do this as part of the checks the IPC carries out to determine whether or not we can accept the application for examination. In deciding whether or not to accept an application the IPC must, amongst other matters, have regard to any adequacy of consultation representation received by it from a local authority consultee.

If the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. A link to the relevant section of our website is provided below. At the pre-application stage ?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works? and ?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? may be of particular interest.

[attachment 1]

28 October 2011
Mr and Mrs W Anderton
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Email received from Mr and Mrs Batt including their comments on the Knutsford to Bowdon Roads Improvement proposal.
The following advice was given:

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. This ensures the impartiality of the IPC and protects the interests of all parties involved in the process. However, correspondence received by the IPC during this stage will be retained on file and made available to the Commissioner once the application is submitted.

During the pre-application stage the developer will be statutorily obliged to consult the local community and statutory bodies, including local authorities; the developer has yet to commence this statutory consultation for this proposal. In addition to providing your comments to the developer at this stage you may also wish to copy them to the relevant local authorities for this proposal.

Once the application is submitted (following the pre-application stage), the IPC will invite local authority consultees to submit an adequacy of consultation representation detailing whether the developer complied with their consultation duties in accordance with the PA 2008. We do this as part of the checks the IPC carries out to determine whether or not we can accept the application for examination. In deciding whether or not to accept an application the IPC must, amongst other matters, have regard to any adequacy of consultation representation received by it from a local authority consultee.

If the IPC accepts the application for examination, there will be the opportunity to register your views with the IPC and participate in the examination by completing a relevant representation form. Details about how and when to register will be publicised by the developer in local newspapers and via on site notices. Further project information, including how to register, will also be available on the IPC website at the relevant stage.

Further information about how to participate in the application process can be found in our advice notes. At the pre-application stage the following advice notes may be of particular interest:

?Advice Note 8.1: How the process works?

[attachment 1]

?Advice Note 8.2: How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal? may be of particular interest.

[attachment 2]

28 October 2011
Mr and Mrs Batt
Enquiry received via post
Letter from Dr Prosser regarding his thoughts on the A556 Knutsford to Bowdon proposal enclosing a petition objecting to the northern section of the proposal near Millington.
The following advice was given:

This proposal is currently at the pre-application stage of the process. Due to the nature of the planning regime established by the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), at the pre-application stage the IPC is unable to process and respond to comments on the merits of a scheme. However, during this stage the developer will be statutorily obliged to consult the local community and statutory bodies, including local authorities; the developer has yet to commence this statutory consultation for this proposal. In addition to providing your comments to the developer you may also wish to copy them to Cheshire East and Trafford Council as relevant local authorities for this proposal.

Once an application is submitted (following the pre-application stage), the IPC invites local authority consultees to submit an ?Adequacy of Consultation Representation? detailing whether the developer complied with their consultation duties in accordance with the PA 2008. We do this as part of the checks the IPC carries out to determine whether or not we can accept the application for examination. In deciding whether or not to accept an application the IPC must, amongst other matters, have regard to any adequacy of consultation representation received by it from a local authority consultee.

Once an application is submitted and if it has been accepted to go forward to examination, the public are invited to register their interest and submit a ?Relevant Representation? to the IPC with a summary of their comments. More detailed representations can then be made during the examination stage.

Further information on the process can be found on our website on the following address: www.independent.gov.uk/infrastructure.

17 October 2011
Dylan Prosser
Enquiry received via phone
IPC noticed that the scoping report submitted by the Highways Agency (HA) on 10th August included a description of works that did not appear to be encapsulated by the red line plan submitted with the request. IPC contacted HA to confirm these issues and query with them the intention for the DCO process.
Ms Pickering from the Highways Agency (HA) was contacted to discuss the information provided to support a request by the HA for a scoping opinion from the IPC. The IPC asked if the elements of the project particularly in relation to de-trunking activities would be included within the scope of works for the Development Consent Order (DCO). The HA confirmed that the DCO would include the works required for de-trunking and that the red line plan provided with the scoping request did not cover all of the land to which the DCO would relate. The IPC informed the HA that on the basis of the discussion it would be neccessary for the IPC to request further information under EIA Regulation 8 (5). The IPC also confirmed that this would be made via a formal notification letter.

17 August 2011
Highways Agency - Anna Pickering
Enquiry received via phone
Telephone conversations on 13 and 20 July 2011 with Leith Planning Limited to discuss the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008) process, opportunities to make comments and representations and whether there are opportunities to appeal the decisions. Query regarding which stage of the process the Knutsford to Bowdon proposal is currently at.
The Knutsford to Bowdon proposal is at the pre-application stage of the process, pre-application consultation in accordance with the PA 2008 has yet to be undertaken by the developer. The enquirer was advised to speak to the developer for more information on their proposed timescales.

The process under the PA 2008 is frontloaded, developers must undertake pre-application consultation prior to submitting the application. Developers will consult with statutory consultees, local authorities, and categories of landowners (s42 of the PA 2008) and also compile a statement of community consultation (incorporating comments from the relevant local authorities), then carry out consultation with the community in accordance with this statement (s47 of the PA 2008). The developer must also publicise the proposal and pre-application consultation (s48 of the PA 2008).

At the pre-application stage a minimum of 28 days must be provided for comments on the proposals to be submitted to the developer. Once an application is submitted to the IPC and if it is accepted for examination, a minimum of 28 days will be provided to make relevant representations to the IPC, this process also registers those making the representation as an interest party.

At the examination stage a minimum of 21 days will be provided for interested parties to make more detailed written representations to the IPC. There will also be an opportunity to comment on these written representations, hearings may also be held.

The decisions cannot be appealed, however a right of challenge exists through judicial review.

The IPC is unable to comment on the merits of any proposals however we can provide advice on the process.

20 July 2011
Leith Planning Limited - Shan Dassanaike
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
The Highways Agency queried why certain bodies had been included within the IPCs draft prescribed consultee list for this proposal.
Follow the link to the letter

21 May 2011
Anna Pickering
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Comments on the proposed A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Highway Project were submitted to the IPC and the Highways Agency. A request to become an interested party was also made.
The IPC responded as follows:
The A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Highway proposal is currently in the pre-application stage of the process in accordance with the Planning Act 2008 (the Act). The applicant has a duty to consult on the proposals at the pre-application stage and the opportunity will be available to you to respond to this formal pre-application consultation once it commences. The applicant will have a duty to take account of any "relevant response" to this consultation prior to submitting their application to the IPC. Please see section 42, 47, 48 and 49 of the Act for more information on the following link: [attachment 1]

To clarify, the application has not yet been submitted to the IPC. It will be submitted following completion of the pre-application stage and if it is accepted for examination by the IPC, you will then have the opportunity to register as an interested party by completing a relevant representation. This process can only take place after an application is accepted.

We have added further advice notes to our website which can be accessed on the following link: [attachment 2]

15 April 2011
Lillian Burns
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
The following enquiry was received regarding the Highways Agency Knutsford to Bowdon proposal:
Please let me know the earliest stage that I can send you a submission objecting to this Highways Agency proposal and kindly ensure that I am sent all relevant notifications and invitations relating to the scheme.
The regime under the Planning Act 2008 is intended to be frontloaded and you are therefore strongly encouraged to contact the applicant with your views at the pre-application stage prior to the submission of their application to the IPC. Once the application has been submitted (and if it is accepted by the IPC), you will have the opportunity to register as an interested party, making an initial relevant representation to the IPC. As an interested party you will then be kept informed of the process and when to make further written representations to the IPC.

We have recently published advice notes which will explain the above procedures in greater detail, please see the following links to the IPC website:

Advice note 8.1 How the process works - opportunities to be involved
[attachment 1]

Advice note 8.2 How to have your say on a major infrastructure proposal - the developer's consultation
[attachment 2]

Advice note 8.3 Putting your case to the IPC - how to register and make a written representation
[attachment 3]

Further Advice Notes are also available on the following link:
[attachment 4]

18 February 2011
Lillian Burns
Enquiry received via email
Highways Agency query regarding statutory consultees and the EIA scoping procedure.
IPC Advice Note 7 states:
'There is no prescribed form for a Regulation 6 notification but any document submitted to the IPC (such as an email or letter) should state clearly that it is a Regulation 6 notification. On receipt of a Regulation 6 notification, the IPC will contact the consultation bodies. This is known as a Regulation 9 notification. This process facilitates preparation of the ES in respect of the proposed development and the applicant should therefore notify the IPC at a point when there is certainty about the scope of the development, any associated development and, if identified at that time, any preferred technological solutions, routes or layouts. At the same time or soon after contacting the consultation bodies, the IPC will let the applicant know which of the consultation bodies were sent a Regulation 9 notification. In some instances, depending on individual circumstances, the applicant may wish to include the Regulation 6 notification with the scoping request'.

Prior to the submission of your scoping request, the IPC will finalise the list of the statutory consultees which we are required to consult in relation to your scoping report. Under the EIA Regulations 8(3), the scoping request must be accompanied by/include 'a plan sufficient to identify the land'. The Commission would expect to receive a 'red line plan' outlining the boundary of the proposed development which encompasses all of the proposals, including any associated development for which a Development Consent Order will be required. We would also request, where ever possible, that the Applicant provides the red line plan in a suitable GIS shape file format.

23 December 2010
Highways Agency - Anna Pickering
Enquiry received via phone
Query regarding preliminary environmental information (PEI).
IPC's Guidance Note 1 on the Pre-Application Stages (Chapter 2 of the Planning Act 2008) provides useful guidance on the timing and legislative requirements for PEI.

Guidance Note 1 was written to assist those involved in the preparation of applications for development consent on nationally significant infrastructure projects. Within the guidance note, the IPC has given its view on the most likely order for various procedural steps within the pre-applicant process, notably s47 of the Planning Act 2008.

See extract below from IPC Guidance Note 1, page 5:
's47 duty to first consult the local authority in respect of the Statement of Community Consultation (?SOCC?). The SOCC needs to state whether the proposal is EIA development and how the preliminary environmental information is to be consulted upon (Reg 10 of the EIA Regulations), and so when an applicant consults a local authority on the SOCC the local authority will need to have the preliminary environmental information (PEI is defined under Regulation 2 of the EIA Regulations 2009) available at that time so that its response can be an informed one. The consultation with local authorities under s42 and contact with local authorities on the SOCC under s47 can occur in parallel'.

The timing of the s42 (consultation with prescribed consultees, local authorities (LAs), landowners and others with interests in land and significantly affected persons) and s47 stages of consultation should be carefully considered as this may have a bearing on the level of detail provided within the PEI. For example, the LA may advise on early SOCC Consultation or the applicant may wish to benefit from early s42 consultation in order to take account of the fundamental EIA issues (such as flood risk) in the formulation of the scheme.

In either situation, it is for applicants to decide at what stage in the formulation of the scheme they wish to commence statutory pre-application consultation i.e. s42 & s47, and a point at which they feel consultation will be most effective. The applicant should bear in mind that if consulting the LA on the SOCC at an early stage in the process they may not at that time have compiled detailed information on the PEI. Furthermore, the LA's comments on how to consult on the PEI may not be fully informed.
Some applicants are applying a two-stage (or multi-stage) approach to pre-application consultation which includes carrying out s47 consultation before and after the EIA scoping process. This iterative approach to s47 consultation can assist applicants in compiling a more detailed PEI, which can then be consulted on in accordance with the SOCC at a later and subsequent stage of consultation. It is likely that if the PEI is more detailed the consultation on environmental effects will at that stage be more effective.

10 December 2010
Anna Pickering
Enquiry received via email
A request was made for advice on the format of preliminary environmental information (PEI).
Attention was drawn to IPC Guidance Note 1 on the Pre-Application Stages (Chapter 2 of the Planning Act 2008) which provides useful guidance on the timing and legislative requirements for PEI.

The following advice was also given:

Guidance Note 1 was written to assist those involved in the preparation of applications for development consent on nationally significant infrastructure projects. Within the guidance note, the IPC has given its view on the most likely order for various procedural steps within the pre-applicant process, notably s47 of the Planning Act 2008. See extract below from IPC Guidance Note 1, page 5:

? s47 duty to first consult the local authority in respect of the Statement of Community Consultation (?SOCC?). The SOCC needs to state whether the proposal is EIA development and how the preliminary environmental information is to be consulted upon (Reg 10 of the EIA Regulations), and so when an applicant consults a local authority on the SOCC the local authority will need to have the preliminary environmental information (PEI is defined under Regulation 2 of the EIA Regulations 2009) available at that time so that its response can be an informed one. The consultation with local authorities under s42 and contact with local authorities on the SOCC under s47 can occur in parallel.

The timing of the s42 (consultation with prescribed consultees, local authorities (LAs), landowners and others with interests in land and significantly affected persons) and s47 stages of consultation should be carefully considered as this may have a bearing on the level of detail provided within the PEI. For example, the LA may advise on early SOCC Consultation or the applicant may wish to benefit from early s42 consultation in order to take account of the fundamental EIA issues (such as flood risk) in the formulation of the scheme.
In either situation, it is for applicants to decide at what stage in the formulation of the scheme they wish to commence statutory pre-application consultation i.e. s42 & s47, and a point at which they feel consultation will be most effective. The applicant should bear in mind that if consulting the LA on the SOCC at an early stage in the process they may not at that time have compiled detailed information on the PEI. Furthermore, the LA's comments on how to consult on the PEI may not be fully informed.
Some applicants are applying a two-stage (or multi-stage) approach to pre-application consultation which includes carrying out s47 consultation before and after the EIA scoping process. This iterative approach to s47 consultation can assist applicants in compiling a more detailed PEI, which can then be consulted on in accordance with the SOCC at a later and subsequent stage of consultation. It is likely that if the PEI is more detailed the consultation on environmental effects will at that stage be more effective.

07 December 2010
Highways Agency
Enquiry received via email
The Highways Agency asked for clarification on the following paragraph from IPC letter dated 21 May 2010:
"It would be helpful if you could clarify how and in what format you propose to submit information about previous consultation to the IPC. If the information is to be included in the consultation report you may wish to explain the extent to which the project was taken account of in any relevant policy making processes including, for example the statutory Development Plan consultations in the intervening years between developing the route options and the present day. As the relevant draft National Policy Statement has yet to be published, it is likely that the policies within the Development Plan (the adopted Regional Spatial Strategy plus the relevant Local Plan/Local Development Framework) will be important and relevant to the Commission?s consideration of the application."
The purpose of referring to consultations held on statutory development plans in the IPC letter of 21 May 2010 was simply to provide an example of previous consultation which may have referred to the proposed project and which, although preceding the statutory pre-application consultation process under the Planning Act 2008, you may wish to make reference to in your consultation report. There are many potential consultation exercises that may have been carried out in the past and it is for the applicant to decide what material to include in its consultation report.

Although our letter of 21 May 2010 touched upon, as you describe "adherence to the NPS - and ...local / regional planning documents" and in the same paragraph also upon "the requirement to report consultation" we were not intending to establish any causal or dependent link between these two. It is not mandatory for a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) to have been consulted upon in statutory Development Plan processes prior to an application being made.

07 July 2010
Anna Pickering
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Inception meeting to discuss the requirements of the pre-application process and any outreach events, followed by an accompanied site visit.
See meeting note below.

22 June 2010
Cheshire East Council Highways Agency
Enquiry received via post
A draft prescribed consultee list for this proposal was requested.
The IPC compiled a draft list of statutory consultees in accordance with Schedule 1 of The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 (APFP Regulations 2009) based on the information provided to date. This list will remain in draft until a scoping opinion request and further information, including a red line boundary, with the scoping report is received.

Applicants are required to consult the bodies listed in Schedule 1 of the APFP Regulations 2009 when undertaking pre-application consultation in accordance with section 42(a) of the Planning Act 2008, along with the other bodies or persons listed in section 42. When meeting statutory pre-application obligations under section 42, applicants will need to make their own inquiries and carry out site investigations. The IPC would expect applicants however to explain where there were any differences in the consultation bodies identified in Schedule 1 of the APFP Regulations 2009.

25 March 2010
Highways Agency - Anna Pickering
Enquiry received via phone
response has attachments
Discussion via telephone and email regarding pre-application consultation and EIA scoping procedure.
Please follow the link to the letter

16 March 2010
Highways Agency - Anna Pickering