Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 3111

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3285
Suggested Policy Approach Cheshire West and Chester’s commitment to flood risk management and SuDS integration is noted. We recommend that any development proposals near the SRN demonstrate no increased flood risk to National Highways’ assets and ensure that SuDS are designed to prevent surface water runoff from impacting the highway. Coordination with National Highways should be sought where developments interface with SRN drainage infrastructure or flood storage areas. Policy FW1: Flood Risk and Water Management As per NPPF paragraph 59, National Highways are supportive of the identified policy, showing a requirement to minimise the impact on water drainage systems and reducing the reactive maintenance required when flooding events do occur which may impact the SRN. We recommend that if any highway mitigation scheme may have a potential impact on flood risk areas or storage/catchment areas, the Council should work closely with National Highways to mitigate any impacts.

Comment

Representation ID: 3112

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3286
Suggested Policy Approach We are supportive of this policy approach to preserve and enhance natural landscapes and characters. Policy LA1: Landscape We are supportive of the emphasis on protecting landscape character and settlement identity. For any proposals on the SRN which may visually intrude into the local landscape, we recommend that the Council work with National Highways to appropriately mitigate this and reduce impact on the landscape.

Comment

Representation ID: 3113

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3287
We support the protection of ASCVs and recommend that any development near the SRN within or adjacent to these areas demonstrates sensitivity to landscape character. Proposals should include visual impact assessments where relevant and ensure that views from the SRN are not adversely affected, maintaining the scenic and environmental quality of the corridor.

Comment

Representation ID: 3114

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3288
Suggested Policy Approach Clarifying Green Belt and countryside policy boundaries, especially where employment sites are involved, will help manage development pressures near the SRN. This is particularly relevant for areas around Chester and Ellesmere Port, where proximity to SRN corridors like the M53 may require early coordination with National Highways to assess cumulative transport impacts. Policy GB1: Green Belt and Countryside The identification of Grey Belt sites following a review of the Green Belt may lead to the unlocking of additional development sites within existing settlements. Any development proposals where it is viewed that either a single site or the cumulative impact of all proposed sites within each settlement area should be assessed. We recommend that the Council discuss with National Highways any sites of concern following the completion of the Green Belt review.

Comment

Representation ID: 3115

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3289
Suggested Policy Approach Applying the NPPF principles locally will require careful coordination where development proposals intersect with the SRN. Promoting sustainable transport and managing parking provision near SRN corridors will be essential to reduce car dependency and mitigate congestion impacts. Efforts to reduce car reliance and promote sustainable transport must be balanced with the SRN’s role in regional connectivity. Vision-led planning should consider how changes in local travel behaviour may affect SRN usage, particularly around key junctions and inter-urban corridors like the M56 and M53. Policy TA1: Transport and Accessibility By prioritising sustainable travel and reducing car dependency, this approach might help ease pressure on the SRN. However, developments near SRN corridors should be carefully assessed to ensure residual impacts are mitigated and connectivity is maintained. We recommend early engagement with National Highways, as per Circular 01/2022, to ensure that these impacts are identified early in the planning process.

Comment

Representation ID: 3116

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3290
The following interventions, if adopted into the Local Plan policy, may have an impact on the operation and safety of the SRN: STRAT7 (journey time improvements on A54 to M6 Junction 18) N5 (the reintroduction of passenger services and stations on the Northwich line) T1 (Chester Western Relief Road; Winsford–Middlewich link to M6) T2 (Park and Ride site at M53 Junction 12) T4 (safeguard from development disused rail corridors) These policies may impact, positively or negatively, on the SRN at their respective locations. We recommend that the Council engage early with National Highways where these interactions may occur to identify any mitigations to be factored into the development of any forthcoming proposals. We recommend that Cheshire West and Chester Council engage proactively with National Highways with regard to the required transport evidence (relating to the SRN) as the Local Plan is developed. This will ensure that any adverse impact to the SRN is mitigated and that growth promoted through the Local Plan is brought forward in a sustainable manner.

Comment

Representation ID: 3117

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3291
Suggested Policy Approach The approach identified within this policy section is supported by National Highways. Policy ID1: Infrastructure and Developer Contributions Where schemes are identified to include developer funding streams for potential mitigation and interventions on the SRN and highway network, funding mechanisms and timescales will be required to be delineated and presented to National Highways. As per Circular 01/2022, paragraph 52 states: “ The scope and phasing of necessary transport improvements will normally be defined by the company in planning conditions that seek to manage development in line with the completion of these works. In such circumstances, modifications to the SRN must have regard to the need to future-proof the network, while its delivery may require a funding agreement between the development promoter and the company.” We will be available for consultation on these options; however, it is identified that the LPA and developers are not able to rely on RIS funding schemes.

Comment

Representation ID: 3118

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3292
Suggested Policy Approach Developments near key corridors such as the M56 and M53 should be assessed for their transport impacts, with early engagement with National Highways to ensure SRN capacity, safety, and reliability are maintained. The type of employment land identified for development infers the potential for a large increase in HGV movements to and from the SRN; this should be appropriately managed by both developers, employers, and through early engagement with National Highways on sites where it is viewed that there may be undue impacts to the operation of the SRN. Policy EG1: Economic Growth, Employment and Enterprise The allocation and protection of strategic employment sites, particularly for industrial and logistics uses, may increase freight and commuter traffic near the SRN. Developments near key corridors such as the M56 and M53 should be supported by transport assessments and early engagement with National Highways to ensure SRN capacity, safety, and freight resilience are maintained. With regards to appropriate facilities for HGVs, paragraph 46 of Circular 01/2022 states that Government policy is “clear in the Future of Freight Plan… and the NPPF that development proposals for new or expanded distribution centres should make sufficient provision for HGV drivers.” Therefore, it is expected that the Local Plan policy presented will adhere to these aspects.

Comment

Representation ID: 3120

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3294
Suggested Policy Approach The proposed policy emphasis on sustaining town centre vitality and managing out-of-centre development is likely to reduce pressure for car-based retail trips to peripheral locations. This may potentially mitigate congestion impacts on key SRN junctions near major retail parks, particularly around Ellesmere Port with Cheshire Oaks and the A5117 corridor. Policy TC1: Town Centres By reinforcing a town centre first approach and limiting out-of-centre development, Policy TC1 might help reduce car dependency and mitigate traffic impacts on the SRN for those travelling to and from the major settlement areas within the borough. For large-scale development, we recommend that National Highways be consulted on any potential impacts to the SRN for both visitor and HGV/supplier movements.

Comment

Representation ID: 3121

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3295
We support the protection of heritage assets and recommend that any development near SRN corridors be assessed for its impact on historic landscapes, views, and settings. Where SRN infrastructure may affect or be affected by heritage designations, early engagement is essential to ensure appropriate mitigation and design sensitivity.