Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 8587

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Great Boughton Parish Council

SS23
I&O_9078
Great Boughton Parish Council does not think any of the identified potential growth areas around Chester are suitable. They all suffer from the flaws we have identified in our answer to SS 24.

Comment

Representation ID: 8588

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Great Boughton Parish Council

CH02
I&O_9079
CH02. This site should not be removed from the Green Belt or allocated for development. Landowners and developers all want to make the case that their piece of land is Grey Belt and therefore should be allocated for development. As suggested in our answer to SS 22, for plan-making, the point about Grey Belt is that authorities must release it first in sequence before they release non-grey Green Belt land. It does not mean either that if land is Grey Belt then it must be removed from Green Belt or that it should be allocated for development. There is sufficient brownfield and other land in urban areas, and potential for urban regeneration and intensification that means that any release of Green Belt is unnecessary. This may require additional work from CWaC and local communities, including using the CPRE Brownfield Toolkit which has successfully been used to identify significant areas of brownfield land additional to that which the LPA had already identified. It is also clear from the recently adopted Wirral Local Plan (in an adjacent local authority that has significant and restrictive Green Belt) that this strategy is feasible and defensible at a local plan inquiry. It is also sustainable and addresses the significant inequalities in the borough. CH02 fails to meet the NPPF definition of Grey Belt. CH02 is an area between the dual carriageway A41 and the Motorway standard A55(T). The built-up area of Chester is hard-up against the western edge, but CH02 itself is remarkably like the rural area to the east. CH02 is primarily agricultural with wide views softened by trees and hedges. There is little built development. To be Grey Belt, the land must ‘not strongly contribute to any of purposes (a), (b), or (d) in paragraph 143.’. a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas The A41 has proved to be a durable barrier to the sprawl of urban Chester (a small, compact cathedral city in a rural hinterland), for four decades. CH02 has remained rural and prevented the spread of suburbia. Without it, sprawl would have already overwhelmed villages such as Christleton and Littleton, Guilden Sutton, Rowton, Waverton and Pipers Ash. This means that by definition, CH02 contributes strongly to purpose (a). No doubt developers will claim that the A55(T) would form a new barrier to outward sprawl. However, this would be logical nonsense – if the A41 is not able to form a durable barrier (which it would not by definition, if CH02 is allocated for development), then clearly the A55(T) would not form a durable barrier either. Exactly the same logic could be applied to other land – for instance between the A55(T) and Christleton village. b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; The site is in a strategic gap that stops the discrete villages to the east of Chester merging with the Chester urban area. While the NPPF does not provide a strict definition of ‘town’, they are seen as distinct built-up areas whose physical and cultural boundaries merit special protection – which is the case with the distinctive and attractive villages to the east of Chester. For instance, if CH02 was built up, then Chester would merge with Christleton along the A41, and the village would no longer be separate. This also applies to other communities such as Guilden Sutton, Rowton, Waverton and Pipers Ash. Overall CH02 makes a moderate/strong contribution to purpose (b). d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns. Protecting the setting of the cathedral city of Chester was a key consideration in the original designation in 1983 and has remained so ever since. CH02 is the nearest Green Belt and just 2km from the cathedral and city walls, so again, almost by definition CH02 contributes strongly to purpose (d). If CH02 contributed strongly to any one of NPPF143 (a), (b), or (d) it would not be considered Grey Belt. But it contributes strongly to both (a) and (d) so is therefore not Grey Belt. The conclusion is that even if release of Green Belt land was justified overall (which we do not think it is), that in terms of plan-making, CH02 should not be considered. There are a number of other factors that make CH02 unsuitable for development. Traffic congestion • Traffic is already a serious issue with extreme congestion and queues of 0.5 mile common on the A41 and A51. Residents often feel like prisoners in their own homes. • When one of the frequent incidents occur, Google Maps will inevitably route drivers through the villages resulting in further gridlock. This is not accounted for in standard traffic assessment, but it has a real impact on the quality of life for residents. • CH02 is proposed for 35 dwellings per hectare (dph), which would lead to the standard low-density sprawl favoured by the major speculative house-builders. As well as being wasteful of land, here is no recent development in Cheshire where this density has led to either sustainable bus route, or to provision of high-quality walking and cycling routes Rows of identikit houses from spec-builders would all have several cars which would lead to further car dependency, worse air quality and more congestion • It is unlikely that suitable additional transport infrastructure could be provided. There is no room for a dedicated public transport link (such as a continuous busway) and it is almost no possibility that an attractive, convenient cycle or pedestrian link could be provided. Mickle Trafford and Guilden Sutton Villages were subjected to significant house building in the 1970/80s but those developments were not accompanied by highway network improvements. • There is very limited space to provide additional capacity for cars, and none to provide priority for buses, cyclists or pedestrians. Transport for New Homes research in 2025 found that building in locations comparable to CH02 will inevitably lead to a car-dependent community with few local facilities. TfNH studied 20 new greenfield housing developments across England. Nearly all were designed around the car, not sustainable transport. Often residents had to drive for nearly every journey. Residential development on CH02 is not compatible with other stated CWaC local plan objectives. • Although the A56 does not see the same volume of traffic buildup as the A41 and A51 there are numerous rat runs, the most significant being Station Lane in Mickle Trafford which joins with Guilden Sutton Lane leading to the A41 and Wicker Lane leading to the A55. At the outer extent of CH02 Mannings Lane is speed restricted in part and single carriageway for much of its length and wholly unsuitable for additional traffic. Local Air quality • Air pollution Is already a serious problem in the A41/51 corridors, with limits regularly breaching WHO guidelines. This will inevitably result in avoidable early deaths, and an increase in asthma, Chronic respiratory disease, heart disease and birth defects. • The Air Quality Report and other evidence for the Christleton and Littleton Neighbourhood Plan showed that levels of pollution near the A41 and through Christleton Village centre to the A51 is comparable to larger urban locations like Bolton, Bournemouth, Leicester, Edinburgh, Manchester, Newcastle, Liverpool, and Bristol. A wide range of respiratory and cardiovascular chronic conditions result from traffic already in the area. • The Highways network surrounding and through the centre of Christleton are stretched to breaking point with unacceptable serious and life changing accident injury rates from the traffic and congestion as well as oxides of nitrogen and PM2.5 exposure to residents, visitors, schoolchildren and the elderly. • About 4 million people die globally each year as result of outdoor exposure to particulate air pollution. 520,000 excess European deaths a year were attributed to air pollution in 2017. In the UK 40,000 deaths a year are attributed to air. These are mainly due to exposure to nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and fine particles (PM 2.5), including those from tyres and disc brakes which means electric vehicles are not a solution. Also, the additional weight means more road damage • It is unrealistic to expect new residential areas at a low 35dph density to generate sustainable bus services attractive enough to achieve mode shift from cars, and there are no known locations where this has been successful

Comment

Representation ID: 8592

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Great Boughton Parish Council

CH1
I&O_9083
The overall approach is correct, although it is not sufficiently ambitious. There is a high potential for urban intensification to provide a greater density of dwellings that in turn would create walkable areas with good levels of amenities and standard of living. This would be more sustainable and avoid the need to develop greenfield sites outside the current city boundaries. Some communities, for example near the centre of Chester already display these characteristics and could be transferred to other areas. The lack of ambition shows up in the assumed residential densities – 35dph for CH02 is far too low to provide enough local users for either decent local facilities or high-quality public transport to Chester and other destinations.

Comment

Representation ID: 9366

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Great Boughton Parish Council

I&O_9860
Please accept my support for option’s B with CH01 mixed community and housing and CH04 housing. This area North of Chester is extremely under developed and has strong links to Deeside Industrial areas and motorway access. I do appreciate the need for new affordable homes for younger people as I have three sons of my own and the prices in Chester villages are so high and the amount of student accommodation in the city, prohibits our young people being able to start their own lives in the city and forces to remain at home or move away.    

Option B - Follow current Local Plan level and distribution of development

Comment

Representation ID: 9368

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Great Boughton Parish Council

I&O_9862
Please accept my support for option’s B and C with CH01 mixed community and housing and CH04 housing. This area North of Chester is extremely under developed and has strong links to Deeside Industrial areas and motorway access. I do appreciate the need for new affordable homes for younger people as I have three sons of my own and the prices in Chester villages are so high and the amount of student accommodation in the city, prohibits our young people being able to start their own lives in the city and forces to remain at home or move away.   I would like to object vigorously to more housing at CH03 and also CH02 as the road infrastructure can not take more traffic in these areas. CH03 particularly has increased traffic which has already resulted in a child fatality on the Wrexham Road with the new housing development. CH04 has permanent traffic congestion leaving the ring road towards Littleton and the road to Chester from Tarvin crawls in already. Any extra housing in this area will gridlock our city. The only area, in my opinion, to build is CH01 and CH04