Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 15884

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16443
Whilst BDW are in general support of the policy approach in respect of flood risk and water management. However, it is noted that the policy approach seeks to apply a borough wide Sequential Test where required in line with the NPPF and PPG. It is widely acknowledged that the recent revisions to paragraphs 171–174 of the NPPF impose an overly stringent requirement to apply the Sequential Test in areas at risk of surface water flooding. Specifically, paragraph 174 states that “the aim of the Sequential Test is to steer new development to areas with the lowest risk of flooding from any source” (emphasis added). The Environment Agency’s Flood Risk Mapping, which is widely used to identify surface water flood risk, is currently recognized as inaccurate, and lacks specificity when downloaded for use in software applications. Obtaining detailed and reliable data on surface water flooding therefore places an undue burden on developers, requiring extensive technical and geophysical assessments at the earliest stages of planning.  Moreover, the application of the Sequential Test to surface water flooding has recently been addressed in numerous appeal decisions, where Inspectors have permitted development despite the Sequential Test not being fully met10. In these cases, it was determined that the absence of a Sequential Test would not lead to significant realworld consequences once site-specific flood risk mitigation measures are applied11. In light of these considerations, BDW strongly recommends that the policy approach to Sequential Tests incorporates flexibility to assess flood risk from any source on a siteby- site basis. This would help avoid imposing unnecessary and potentially abortive work on developers, as well as the Council, while still ensuring effective flood risk management.

Comment

Representation ID: 15886

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16445
BDW supports the proposed approach to consolidate LPP1 Policies ENV 3 and ENV 4, along with relevant elements of LPP2 Policies DM44 and DM45, into a single, comprehensive policy on green infrastructure, biodiversity, and geodiversity. The creation of an integrated policy is welcomed, as it provides greater clarity and consistency for both developers and decision-makers. A single, consolidated policy will help ensure that the relevant policy tests are clearly articulated and applied in a proportionate and effective manner, while reducing duplication across the Local Plan. To ensure the effectiveness of the proposed policy approach, BDW recommends that the policy strikes a balance between protecting important green and natural assets and supporting sustainable development. It should be informed by up-to-date ecological evidence and allow for flexibility in its application, taking account of site-specific circumstances, viability considerations, and the potential for biodiversity enhancements to be achieved both on- and off-site where appropriate.

Comment

Representation ID: 15888

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16447
BDW acknowledges the Council’s ambition to achieve a minimum of 16% tree cover in all wards across Cheshire West and Chester, and supports the principle of enhancing woodland and tree planting as part of new development where appropriate. However, BDW cautions against the policy becoming overly prescriptive in its requirements—for example, by specifying required tree species, numbers, or replacement ratios such as a 2:1 standard, which does not take account of tree condition etc. As such, this level of detail may not be appropriate in all contexts and could undermine the deliverability or viability of development, particularly on more constrained sites. The policy should allow for sufficient flexibility to enable site-specific solutions that deliver meaningful tree planting and green infrastructure enhancements, while recognising other design and viability considerations. Any tree replacement or contribution policy should be proportionate, supported by clear evidence, and include scope for off-site contributions where on-site delivery is not feasible.

Comment

Representation ID: 15891

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16450
BDW strongly advises against the Council imposing a mandatory biodiversity net gain (BNG) requirement that exceeds the 10% target set nationally. The current national requirement has been carefully calibrated to balance environmental benefits with the practicalities and viability of delivering development. Increasing the mandatory BNG beyond 10% risks placing undue burdens on developers, potentially affecting the viability and delivery of sustainable housing and infrastructure. Instead, the Council should support a flexible approach that encourages enhancements above the national minimum where feasible, through incentives or partnership working, rather than making higher gains compulsory. This approach will help ensure that biodiversity objectives are met without compromising the overall effectiveness and deliverability of the Local Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 15892

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16451
BDW are supportive of the proposed policy approach set out in HE 1. In particular, BDW agrees that development should be prevented where it results in substantial harm to or total loss of the significance of a designated heritage asset, unless it is demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss. This approach is consistent with paragraph 214 of the NPPF.

Comment

Representation ID: 15893

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16452
BDW supports the principle of delivering high-quality design and is generally supportive of the proposed policy approach set out in DS1. However, it is noted that the policy seeks to apply a wide range of national and local design standards and guidance, including: • Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS) • National Design Guide • National Model Design Code • Manual for Streets • Locally prepared Design Guides and Design Codes (including those from neighbourhood planning groups) The cumulative application of all these standards risks creating an overly prescriptive approach that could constrain development and compromise scheme viability. Sites pecific factors such as flood risk, ecology, highways, and utilities—each governed by their own technical requirements—must also be carefully balanced with design aspirations. BDW recommends that the policy be amended to incorporate flexibility in its application. This will allow for site-responsive design solutions that achieve high-quality outcomes without being unduly restricted by a one-size-fits-all policy framework.

Comment

Representation ID: 15896

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16455
BDW would not object to the preparation of a borough-wide Design Code, provided it is used as a flexible guidance document rather than a rigid policy tool. The Design Code should be proportionate, evidence-based, and allow for site-specific interpretation to reflect varying local character, development contexts, and technical constraints. It should also be subject to public consultation and viability testing to ensure it supports, rather than hinders, the delivery of sustainable development across the borough.

Comment

Representation ID: 15901

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16460
BDW supports the objective of delivering high sustainability standards in buildings, in line with the Council’s ambition to achieve net zero carbon emissions in new residential and commercial development. However, BDW strongly cautions against the introduction of local policy requirements that duplicate or go beyond sustainability standards already secured through national building regulations or other established frameworks. Such duplication risks creating unnecessary complexity, uncertainty, and potential viability issues for future development.

Comment

Representation ID: 15904

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16463
BDW supports a clear and consistent approach to sustainable design and energy efficiency. The National Design Guide energy hierarchy provides a nationally recognised and balanced framework that prioritises energy demand reduction, energy efficiency, and the use of low-carbon and renewable energy sources. As such, BDW considers it appropriate for the Local Plan to adopt this hierarchy, provided it is applied flexibly and in a manner proportionate to site-specific constraints and viability considerations. It is important that any adopted energy hierarchy aligns with national policy and avoids introducing prescriptive local requirements that could conflict with or duplicate national standards.

Comment

Representation ID: 15906

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Barratt & David Wilson Homes

Agent: Turley

I&O_16465
BDW does not support the introduction of higher local standards that go beyond those set out in national Building Regulations. The Building Regulations are the appropriate mechanism for securing energy efficiency and carbon reduction in new development, and they are subject to regular review and updates to reflect national policy objectives, including the transition to net zero. Introducing locally specific standards risks fragmenting policy requirements, adds complexity to the planning process, and may impact development viability. As above, BDW therefore considers that the Local Plan should align with national standards and avoid setting additional local requirements.