Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 5894

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT strongly supports a review of the Strategic Green Gap, noting that it is a locally derived designation and its existing boundaries should not automatically be retained. The review should identify which areas and landscape features genuinely prevent settlement coalescence and maintain separate settlement identities. TT considers that the designation should be no larger than necessary to achieve these purposes. It argues that the Council should assess whether more tightly defined boundaries could maintain appropriate separation between settlements while also enabling sustainable development opportunities to contribute towards meeting Cheshire East’s identified housing needs.

Comment

Representation ID: 5895

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT supports the review of the settlement hierarchy, including the Council's proposed consideration of services and facilities, population, employment, sustainable
transport, retail provision and settlement form. The assessment should consider not only the existing role of settlements but their capacity to accommodate growth
sustainably, and associated infrastructure, over the plan period. Crewe should continue to perform as one of two Principal Towns in accommodating development.

Comment

Representation ID: 5896

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

The spatial distribution of growth should be established principally by the need to meet identified development needs in sustainable and deliverable locations. The
Council anticipates that the scale of development required will mean edge-of settlement growth, larger urban extensions and potentially new settlements. No
single source of supply is likely to provide an adequate or resilient strategy. A strategy that creates sustainable opportunities adjoining Principal Towns, where
new development can make use of existing infrastructure while delivering improvements to services and facilities, is one the Council should fully explore. The
Gresty Lane Site is an example of such an opportunity, capable of providing housing alongside a new primary school, extensive public open space, walking and cycling
infrastructure and other community benefits.

Comment

Representation ID: 5897

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

The treatment of development within and outside settlements is clearly defined in the 2026 NPPF and does not need to be replicated in the Local Plan. If this section
is intended to relate solely to isolated rural development, that should be made explicit.
The Council will still need to determine what should be classified as ‘in settlements’ and what should be classified as ‘countryside’. The Council should avoid the use of
overly restrictive settlement boundaries/development limits which could hamper and restrict future growth options in key settlements. For this reason, the Council should
recognise that sites which are adjacent to and well-related to existing settlements may also be sustainable options for growth and meeting housing needs. Therefore,
having a flexible approach to settlement boundaries/development limits will assist
with boosting windfall development and introduce additional flexibility into the Council’s future housing supply.

Comment

Representation ID: 5898

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT is supportive of the Council in undertaking a Housing Needs Assessment (“HNA”) and considers that this is a key part of the evidence base of the new Local Plan. It
will be important that in translating its outputs into policies, that a degree of flexibility
is maintained.

Comment

Representation ID: 5899

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

TT considers that affordable housing requirements should reflect variations in housing need, affordability and market conditions across Cheshire East, potentially through geographically differentiated requirements. Whole-plan viability evidence should ensure affordable housing and other policy obligations do not undermine development delivery. TT supports flexibility in tenure requirements to respond to site circumstances, viability and changing needs. Given affordability challenges, it argues that the Local Plan should consider the relationship between overall housing supply and affordable housing delivery. The Council should therefore assess whether housing growth above the minimum requirement could improve affordability, deliver additional affordable homes and support wider economic growth ambitions.

Comment

Representation ID: 5900

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

Any forthcoming HNA will likely set out the broad housing requirements of different groups across Cheshire East. TT considers that its findings should inform rather than
prescribe an inflexible dwelling mix for individual sites. The Council itself recognises that requirements may need to respond to changing household sizes, affordability
pressures, an ageing population and individual development sites. Site characteristics, local need, design considerations and changes in market conditions
over the plan period should therefore remain relevant considerations.

Comment

Representation ID: 5901

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

IM Land support the Council's review of housing standards, including accessibility,
water efficiency and nationally described space standards. Such standards play an important role in ensuring new homes meet the needs of current and future residents,
whilst also supporting the Government ambition within Chapter 14 of the August 2026 NPPF to promote high quality, healthy, inclusive and sustainable places.
However, any policy requirements relating to housing standards should be tested
through the Council's viability assessment to ensure that they do not undermine the
deliverability of planned housing growth.
In accordance with Policy PM13 of the August 2026 NPPF, any locally applied standards should be proportionate, evidence-led and avoid unnecessary duplication
of matters addressed through Building Regulations. The Council should also recognise that housing needs, technologies and market conditions may evolve over
the plan period and therefore policies should retain an appropriate degree of flexibility.

Comment

Representation ID: 5902

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

IM Land support the Council's intention to consider policies relating to climate change adaptation. Appropriate adaptation measures can improve the resilience of new development to the effects of climate change, including overheating, flood risk, water scarcity and extreme weather events. The Local Plan should support outcomes-based policies that encourage resilient design, sustainable drainage systems, urban greening and water efficiency measures, whilst retaining sufficient flexibility for developers to respond to site-specific circumstances and evolving technologies. Any requirements should be supported by proportionate evidence and tested through the whole-plan viability assessment.

Comment

Representation ID: 5903

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: RPS Tetra Tech

IM Land agree that the Local Plan can play a role in supporting the Government's net zero strategy and national standards. Policies should focus on clear sustainability outcomes while retaining flexibility for schemes to respond to site circumstances, technological change and infrastructure availability. This approach is consistent with the Written Ministerial Statement of December 2023 (UIN HCWS123), which confirms that Government does not expect plan-makers to set local energy efficiency standards beyond current or planned Building Regulations, and with Policy PM13 of
the August 2026 NPPF, which permits local energy efficiency standards that exceed Building Regulations only where supported by a clear and robustly costed justification demonstrating no adverse impact on viability and deliverability.