Option 5

No

Representation ID: 27320

Received: 24/01/2019

Respondent: Beech Developments (NW) Ltd

Agent: The Planning Consultancy

Nor do we support Options 2, 3 and 5 which in their different ways seek to direct all development either to the A55 corridor, to key settlements alone, or to hubs and corridors, there is always a need for balance with the greatest level of growth directed to the most sustainable locations, but an overall sustainable approach must also consider housing needs within the smaller settlements so as to maintain and even improve their viability/vitality in the future.

Noted.

No

Representation ID: 27350

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: Home Builders Federation Ltd

The HBF do not support options 1, 2, 3 or 6 and do not support one particular option but instead elements of Options 4, 5 and although these are described in very different ways, comparing the plans they look very similar. Accordingly, we suggest the Council look to develop a hybrid option based on these options, which gives the greatest flexibility for growth based around sustainable settlements (Urban, Satellite Settlements and the Local Service Centres), according to their ability to accommodate development, therefore providing greater likelihood of the plan being able to deliver the identified vision, objectives and needs.

Accepted in principle. A growth distribution similar to what has been suggested is planned for the Preferred Strategy and will be subject to further consultation.

No

Representation ID: 27373

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited

Agent: Axis

Scores positively in the majority of sustainability appraisal objectives and would be suited to all of the settlement hierarchy options. However focusing growth on transport hubs and corridors would have mixed results. Growth would be focused within the sustainable locations, however further development along the A470 and A5 could encourage greater car use. This option would also result in additional development pressure on those settlements along transport corridors and strategic hubs, which may not be suitable. This option is also not considered to have a sufficient level of flexibility to withstand unforeseen circumstances and limited mechanisms to promote brownfield land.

Noted.