Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 15207

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15766
No particular comments in respect of those listed at paragraph 5.12, other than to echo the HBF’s comment that not all of the list provided are showstoppers, rather, some elements (such as flood risk) just need careful consideration in respect of masterplanning and how development is delivered on site.

Comment

Representation ID: 15208

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15767
Sites must be demonstrated to be developable, sustainable and deliverable, in line with the NPPF definitions and PPG Guidance.

Comment

Representation ID: 15209

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15768
Overall, we welcome the identification of potential growth areas as a proactive measure to seek to address the significant emerging housing needs within CW&C.

Comment

Representation ID: 15210

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15769
Barratt Redrow fully support Chester receiving the highest level of growth in the emerging plan, as it did in the adopted plan, where it was and remains the largest settlement and only City at the top of the settlement hierarchy. As such we support spatial Option B in respect of Chester (which proposes 5000+ homes), and note that if the previous local plan apportionment (5,200 of 22,000 or 23.64%) is applied to the emerging 15 year requirement of 29,000 then Chester would receive growth of 6,855 homes , which seems entirely reasonable and deliverable, with the 4 potential growth areas shown having a total indicative capacity of 11,980. Whilst the final development numbers for Chester will be refined as the Local Plan progresses, Barratt Redrow fully support the identification of potential growth areas CH03 (Lache Lane) and CH02 (Land at Hare Lane) on Map 5.4 at this stage of the plan process, and consider that these two areas are suitable options for housing allocation in Chester because: In respect of CHO3, Redrow’s Land at Lache Lane/Wrexham Road Extension site, which is located at the north-eastern extent of CH03, represents a logical first development phase of CH03 as: It comprises a Grey Belt site which can deliver development of circa 160 dwellings in the first five years of the plan period. It is unconstrained in respect of all technical considerations. It benefits from a sustainable location, located directly adjacent to Kings Moat Garden Village, which is being built out by Redrow and Taylor Wimpey. Whilst Land at Lache Lane/Wrexham Road Extension can be delivered in isolation, the wider CH03 parcel (known as Decoy Farm) – which extends to the A55 to the south, represents a logical rounding off to the Green Belt boundary and is a suitable broad location for growth. It does not provide a strong contribution to the historic setting of Chester and purpose d) of the Green Belt. It is considered that this entire CH03 growth area will be required to meet Chester’s and CW&C’s substantial housing requirements. The entire CH03 parcel has capacity to deliver around 1,200 homes. In respect of CH02, Redrow’s site at Land at Hare Lane is a highly suitable residential site as: It comprises a Grey Belt site which can deliver development of circa 560 dwellings early on in the plan period. It is unconstrained in respect of all technical considerations. Benefits from a highly sustainable location for growth, with various facilities and services located within walking distance. Again, whilst Land at Hare Lane can be delivered in isolation and as an early development phase, it will not undermine the delivery of the wider CH02 site – which is also appropriate for Green Belt release in its entirety. When reviewing Green Belt boundaries in this location, releasing the land parcels located between the A55 and A41 is entirely logical, noting the requirement of NPPF paragraph 149 in respect of the need to identify clear, permanent boundaries. The A55 clearly comprises a durable Green Belt boundary. This is equally the case in respect of the CH03 Growth Area – which also benefits from strong, durable boundaries including the A55 to the south and a railway line to the west. The same cannot be said for growth areas CH01 and CH04, which have less durable boundaries and are more open in character.

Comment

Representation ID: 15211

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15770
No comments at this stage.

Comment

Representation ID: 15212

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15771
Barratt Redrow do not have any particular comments to make at this stage.

Comment

Representation ID: 15213

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15772
Policy CH 1 notes how the new Local Plan will set out the level and location of new development with protection of the historic environment and special character of the city remaining the priority. Barratt Redrow is wholly supportive of this approach, and the need to protect the historic character of the city, whilst at the same time delivering sustainable development in the right location. As explained earlier in this section, Land at Lache Lane and Land at Hare Lane can deliver this aim, without adversely impacting the historic character/setting of Chester, particularly in light of recent updates to the NPPF and NPPG in respect of Grey Belt land.

Comment

Representation ID: 15215

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15774
The suggested allocations relate to employment only, therefore no comments at this stage.

Comment

Representation ID: 15216

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15775
Barratt Redrow support the high levels of growth suggested for Ellesmere Port under Options B (5,000+homes) and C (3,000-5,000 homes), noting that if the previous local plan apportionment (4,800 of 22,000 or 21.81 %) was applied to the emerging 15-year requirement of 29,000 then Ellesmere Port would receive growth of 6,325 homes , which seems entirely reasonable and proportionate. Whilst the final development numbers for Ellesmere Port will be determined as the Local Plan progresses, Barratt Redrow fully support the identification of potential growth area EP02 (Dunkirk Farm) on Map 5.5 at this stage of the plan process. This potential growth area is the most suitable option for housing allocation in Ellesmere Port because, as discussed in more detail in the Development Framework and other technical reports contained at Appendix 6: It will deliver much needed homes (around 550) in a sustainable location – with a number of facilities located within walking distance from the site, including bus services, a local pharmacy and primary school. It is unconstrained in respect of all technical considerations and can deliver 10% biodiversity net gain on site. It comprises a Grey Belt site, in line with the NPPF definition. Has the ability to deliver housing early on in the Plan Period and could start to deliver some housing within the first five years.

Comment

Representation ID: 15217

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt Redrow Plc

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group Ltd

I&O_15776
No detailed comments at this stage – other than to note that growth option EP01, located to the immediate south of the Dunkirk Farm Growth Area, is a mixed housing/employment area. Should additional employment development be located in the area to the south, Dunkirk Farm is very well placed to accommodate this growth and to meet the additional housing needs of the area in a sustainable manner.