Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 9354

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

I&O_9848
We support the Council’s identification of Northwich as a strategic focus for new development. However, as mentioned in response to SS29 above, the broad blobs on Map 5.6 illustrating ‘Northwich growth options’ are misleading and not representative of the opportunities for housing delivery in Northwich. Stage One of the LAA clearly identifies a range of sites, so the those illustrated on the map are not the only options. The Council will need to rely on these smaller sites to deliver the high housing need. Throughout the whole borough, smaller sites will be a critical source of new housing as larges sites are constrained by the Green Belt at several key settlements. These smaller sites are important for housing delivery because they diversify supply and can help create more socially integrated communities. For example, our client’s Site is underutilised land adjacent to an existing residential settlement and with good links into existing infrastructure and services. It is a sustainable location for new housing and the development will have minimal impact on the open character of Davenham. Contributions from these types of sites are key to meeting the high housing targets and must be factored into growth plans for Northwich.

Comment

Representation ID: 9355

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

I&O_9849
The suggested approach is for Northwich to be a strategic focus for new development and for regeneration, seeking to maximising housing and other development on previously developed land. Proposed Policy NO 1 maintains the Northwich urban area boundary to comprise of the town of Northwich and the adjoining settlements, which includes the village of Davenham. We firmly support the retention of these settlements in the defined area. As mentioned in response to question SS5 above, we strongly support the Council in their placed based approach and the proposal to retain an overarching and locally distinct policy for Northwich. This will help ensure that planned growth appropriately considers the capacity of existing infrastructure and the impacts of growth on the existing settlement, particularly in regard to landscape and townscape.

Comment

Representation ID: 9356

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

I&O_9850
We strongly encourage the Council to consider all sites within and on the periphery of the adjoining settlements that comprise the Northwich urban area, such as our client’s site at Green Lane. The Place background paper for Northwich (amended 2024) identified that our client’s site falls within the ‘Davenham Village and Leftwich Grange (Kingsmead) KSG’. This area is a relatively small, narrow linear green space south of the A556, and is currently experiencing development on the easter part, which is eroding the separation functions this area once had. As mentioned in response to question SS20, KSG designation should not unanimously be perceived as a ‘showstopper’ and unnecessary restrictions should not be placed on assessments identifying future site allocations.

Comment

Representation ID: 9357

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

I&O_9851
Yes. The proposed Policy NO 1 maintains that the Northwich urban area boundary comprises of the town of Northwich and the adjoining settlements, which includes the village of Davenham. These settlements have been included in Northwich’s defined area for a long time, and we strongly support their retention. Opportunities have been identified within Davenham for appropriate levels of development that will support housing delivery and local needs and contribute to the Council’s growth strategy for Northwich more widely. It is essential that the potential of the adjoining settlements is therefore recognised in Northwich’s place-based policy, and we encourage the Council to consider all potential areas for development within the urban area and adjacent to the established settlements.

Comment

Representation ID: 9358

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

I&O_9852
Government’s housing delivery target for CW&C is a minimum 1,914 dpa, equating to 28,710 new homes over the proposed 15-year period of the new Local Plan. The details of this policy will heavily depend on the outcomes of the Housing Need Assessment, which is yet to be prepared, but will provide the basis for delivering the mix of homes required and the requirement for affordable housing.

Comment

Representation ID: 9359

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

I&O_9853
It is logical for targets to be specific to the needs of particular areas and to take into account the location of development. Housing mix and specialist housing targets should be guided by local needs and site-specific factors, not rigid percentages. The policy must remain flexible to allow for full consideration of site opportunities, viability, and affordability while ensuring developments stay deliverable. The Council should allow for targets to adapt to up-to-date housing evidence and future needs, so the mix of homes remains realistic and sustainable.

Comment

Representation ID: 9360

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

I&O_9854
We support the suggest approach toward delivering affordable housing but again highlight the importance of the policy allowing for flexibility so that viability issues can be appropriate considered and managed.

Comment

Representation ID: 9361

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

I&O_9855
We are against the Council’s suggested approach of retaining and combine the existing Local Plan (Part One) policy ENV2 and Local Plan (Part Two) policy GBC3. The current policy approach is too constrained and risks limiting growth opportunities, and landscape existing designations should not simply be carried forward without reassessment against growth and housing needs. CW&C is entering a new growth phase and is faced with significantly higher housing targets with an estimated minimum of 1,914 dpa, compared current Local Plan’s minimum of 1,100 dpa. Considering this 75% increase, it is not appropriate for the Council to simply roll forward this a policy constrained approach which could restrict growth opportunities and disregard potential suitable development sites prior to a more detailed assessment. The new Local Plan should continue to protect and enhance landscape character and local distinctiveness. However, it is important to balance this with development needs, particularly in the context of the Government’s increased housing target. As such, the existing KSG designations should not be carried forward without being clearly justified against a detailed consideration of growth and housing needs. We recommend that the Council undertakes a comprehensive Landscape review to assess the quality and value of landscape should be included in the new Local Plan’s evidence base. A detailed assessment is needed to justify any policy restrictions and to ensure new designations are backed by evidence and proper evaluation of the quality and value of the landscape. Flexibility in policy LA 1 is supported, allowing development in KSGs where it avoids coalescence, protects distinctiveness, and respects settlement character. Development should not be blocked in otherwise sustainable locations at settlement edges, such as our clients Site at Green Lane.

Comment

Representation ID: 9362

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

I&O_9856
Yes, the key settlement gaps (KSGs) should be reviewed. The Place background paper for Northwich (amended 2024) considers the KSG known as 'Davenham Village and Leftwich Grange (Kingsmead) KSG', which is a relatively small, narrow linear green space south of major road infrastructure (A556). While the area does afford a perceptual break, the Council notes the strong influence of the road, as well as the increasing erosion of this gap due to recent consents and ongoing development. The function of this KSG is therefore questionable and the Council itself acknowledge its weakening role in maintaining separation and local character. Development at this Site would not undermine the local character or distinctiveness. Though maintaining a perception of separation between settlements is important, it should not prevent appropriate development in locations that can deliver much needed housing. Flexibility should be built into the new Local Plan, and the policy should allow for exceptions for appropriate development. The current evidence base for KSG designations is outdated, with information dating back to the Vale Royal Local Plan (2006), with updated Landscape Studies having been in 2016. A new Landscape Strategy should be undertaken to ensure that KSGs continue to serve their purpose of protecting settlement identity and distinctiveness. Particular attention should be given to the three KSGs in Davenham, where enabling sustainable urbane extensions is essential to meeting the borough's new housing targets and growth plans for Northwich.