Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Search representations

Results for CPRE Cheshire Branch search

New search New search

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question HO 11

Representation ID: 11677

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12175
Yes. However, we would welcome strengthening of Policy DM25 clause 5 to make it clearer that over-sized dwellings which are much larger than the functional requirement will not be allowed.

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question HO 12

Representation ID: 11678

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12176
Through conditions and/or section 106 agreements.

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question HO 13

Representation ID: 11679

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12177
This advice note should at the very least be retained (and specifically referred to in the policy) to enable adequate control over this type of development.

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question HO 14

Representation ID: 11680

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12178
No comments.

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question HO 15

Representation ID: 11681

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12179
Yes. We support the need for schemes to be generally modest in scale, in keeping with the form and character of the settlement and in line with a robust housing needs assessment. We would also stress the need for such schemes to be developed in close consultation with any relevant local Parish and/or Town Council.

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question HO 16

Representation ID: 11682

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12180
We cannot see why it would not apply to all smaller settlements, but subject to criteria such as those we identify in our answer to Q HO15.

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question HO 17

Representation ID: 11684

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12182
Only where this is clearly justified by robust and independent viability evidence, kept to a minimum level and where the overall benefits of the scheme clearly over-ride any planning harm.

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question HO 18

Representation ID: 11685

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12183
No comment.

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question GT 1

Representation ID: 11686

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12184
Yes

Comment

Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Question GT 2

Representation ID: 11687

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

Representation Summary:

I&O_12185
Yes. Gypsy and traveller sites should not be allowed in the Green Belt (including “grey belt”).

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.