Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 5881

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT considers that the new Local Plan should adopt a positive approach to housing growth, meeting Cheshire East’s housing needs in full. The current local housing need figure of 2,530 dwellings per year, or 40,480 homes over 2029–2045, should form the minimum starting point and be updated as new data becomes available. TT argues that the Council should assess whether a higher housing requirement is necessary to provide flexibility and a range of sites, address viability, align housing with employment growth, meet neighbouring authorities’ unmet needs and enable greater affordable housing delivery. These matters should be thoroughly tested through the evidence base.

Comment

Representation ID: 5883

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT considers there is a clear justification for planning for housing growth above the minimum requirement. The Council should consider Cheshire East’s role within the Cheshire and Warrington growth area and the economic importance of Crewe when establishing its housing requirement. TT argues that relying solely on minimum housing need could fail to align housing provision with recent employment and economic growth, potentially increasing commuting into and across the borough and creating less sustainable travel patterns. The Local Plan should therefore assess higher levels of housing growth to support economic ambitions, infrastructure investment and a sustainable balance between new homes and employment opportunities.

Comment

Representation ID: 5884

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT highlights the Council’s current housing land supply shortfall and the limited capacity of brownfield land to meet housing needs, arguing that the new Local Plan should allocate a range of sites, including greenfield land. It considers that the Plan should adopt a positive, evidence-led and deliverable spatial strategy, with sufficient flexibility to maintain housing delivery throughout the plan period. TT also recommends an earlier plan start date, potentially from 2026, to ensure existing unmet need is addressed. The spatial strategy should clearly identify the expected location of development, protected areas, policy designations and allocations through a key diagram and policies map.

Comment

Representation ID: 5885

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT welcome the Council’s intention to undertake a Green Belt Assessment to identify grey belt land and inform future Green Belt release. The Council should also
undertake a review of its Strategic Green Gaps. In reviewing Green Belt and Strategic Green Gap boundaries, it should be recognised that such land is often the most sustainable, viable and deliverable and can support a sustainable spatial strategy and the maintenance of a five-year supply of deliverable housing.

Comment

Representation ID: 5886

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

The new Local Plan should also be aligned, where practicable, with the emerging Cheshire and Warrington Combined Authority Spatial Development Strategy (SDS),
reflecting the inherent relationship between the SDS and Local Plans.

Comment

Representation ID: 5888

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT supports the recognition that a Strategic Environmental Assessment is required to ensure the new Local Plan is legally sound and prepared in accordance with
statutory requirements.

Comment

Representation ID: 5889

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT supports a plan period of 2029–2045 as a minimum, but considers that a longer period may be necessary to accommodate strategic development and major infrastructure. Given the scale of housing need, TT expects larger strategic sites may be required, with a longer plan period allowing sufficient time for infrastructure delivery, masterplanning, phasing and investment certainty. However, TT objects to starting the plan period at adoption in 2029, as this would fail to address existing unmet housing need. It recommends an earlier start date, at least from 2026, with consideration also given to starting the plan period even earlier.

Comment

Representation ID: 5891

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT considers that the Local Plan Vision should be spatially driven and place-based, clearly setting out how development will be distributed across Cheshire East rather than relying on generic aspirations. The Vision should seek to meet housing needs in full, improve access to affordable housing and provide a suitable mix of homes. It should promote high-quality, sustainable development supported by timely infrastructure, green spaces and recreation facilities. Development should also enhance biodiversity and environmental quality, encourage sustainable travel and improved connectivity, and support the vitality and viability of both rural villages and larger settlements across the borough.

Comment

Representation ID: 5892

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT supports the Council's recognition that the amount of development to be planned for will be informed by evidence including future housing and employment needs,
infrastructure capacity, environmental constraints and opportunities for regeneration. Affordability should also be treated as a determinative factor in setting the scale of
development to be planned.

Comment

Representation ID: 5893

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT supports a comprehensive and transparent Land Availability Assessment, assessing sites based on their suitability, availability, deliverability and viability. It considers that sites should initially be assessed on a ‘policy-off’ basis, rather than existing designations such as Strategic Green Gap or Open Countryside automatically determining suitability. TT argues that site selection should focus on the individual planning merits and evidence for each site, particularly where existing designations are under review. The assessment should also consider whether identified constraints can be satisfactorily addressed through appropriate design and mitigation, ensuring that potentially suitable and deliverable sites are not prematurely excluded from consideration.