Local plan scoping consultation

Search representations

Results for Deloitte search

New search New search

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Local plan period

Representation ID: 6545

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

TCE supports the proposed plan period to 2045. However, the Local Plan should also consider longer-term growth requirements beyond the end of the plan period, particularly where strategic urban extensions or new settlement opportunities are being assessed.
Larger sites may require delivery across multiple phases and potentially beyond a single plan period. This should not prevent such opportunities from being considered through the plan-making process, although their delivery may extend beyond a single plan period.

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Creating a vision and objectives

Representation ID: 6546

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

The respondent supports a clear, locally focused and deliverable vision for Cheshire East that reflects increased housing needs, housing land supply challenges, economic growth ambitions and the need to review Green Belt policy. They argue that the Local Plan should proactively accommodate growth rather than simply manage it, delivering homes, jobs, infrastructure, environmental improvements and healthy communities. Key priorities identified include meeting housing need in full, providing affordable and mixed housing, supporting economic growth, considering Green Belt release where necessary, assessing strategic growth options, directing development to sustainable locations, integrating infrastructure with development, enhancing green infrastructure and biodiversity, and maintaining a deliverable supply of development sites.

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Identifying and assessing sites

Representation ID: 6547

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

The respondent supports a robust, transparent and evidence-led site assessment process to identify a sufficient and varied supply of development sites. They argue the methodology should assess all site types fairly, including small sites, safeguarded land, settlement-edge growth, urban extensions and new settlements. Key assessment factors should include deliverability, availability, infrastructure, transport accessibility, housing and employment potential, environmental impacts and Green Belt considerations. The response cautions against dismissing strategic sites due to longer delivery timescales, noting their potential to provide infrastructure and long-term growth. TCE’s landholdings are presented as offering both short-term and longer-term development opportunities.

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Green Belt

Representation ID: 6548

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

The respondent supports integrating Green Belt assessment with site selection, settlement hierarchy and spatial strategy work, rather than treating it as a separate exercise. They argue that Green Belt sites should be assessed alongside all other reasonable alternatives using consistent criteria, including sustainability, deliverability, infrastructure, accessibility and environmental impacts. The response cautions against automatically favouring non-Green Belt sites or relying on theoretical brownfield capacity without evidence of deliverability. It advocates a transparent methodology that fairly considers safeguarded land, settlement extensions and strategic growth opportunities, with Green Belt release decisions informed by wider spatial planning objectives and supported by clear evidence and audit trails.

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Strategic green gap

Representation ID: 6549

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

The respondent supports reviewing the Strategic Green Gap designation and recognises its role in maintaining the separation and identity of settlements. However, they argue that the assessment should be evidence-based and acknowledge that different parts of a Green Gap make varying contributions to this objective. The response states that Strategic Green Gaps should not be treated as absolute constraints on development, particularly given the borough’s growth needs. Instead, decisions should balance the protection of settlement identity with considerations such as housing need, sustainability, deliverability, infrastructure provision and landscape impacts when assessing potential development opportunities.

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Settlement hierarchy

Representation ID: 6550

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

The respondent supports reviewing the settlement hierarchy to help guide future growth and ensure development is directed to sustainable locations. They advocate an up-to-date assessment based on access to services, employment, transport, infrastructure and development potential. Knutsford is identified as a Key Service Centre that should accommodate a greater share of growth due to its facilities, connectivity and available land opportunities, including allocated and safeguarded sites. The response also highlights Plumley’s railway station and argues that rail-connected settlements should be given greater weight in the hierarchy, with opportunities for proportionate growth linked to sustainable transport accessibility.

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Spatial distribution

Representation ID: 6551

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

The respondent supports a balanced spatial strategy that uses a mix of development types and locations to meet Cheshire East’s housing needs. They advocate considering brownfield land, existing allocations, safeguarded land, urban extensions, station-related development, smaller sites and potential new settlements. The response argues against relying solely on either small dispersed developments or a limited number of large strategic sites, emphasising the need for both early housing delivery and long-term infrastructure-led growth. It calls for a comparative assessment of development opportunities based on sustainability, deliverability, infrastructure, transport connectivity, environmental impacts, Green Belt considerations and wider public benefits.

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Development in settlements

Representation ID: 6552

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

The respondent supports retaining settlement boundaries as a tool for managing development but argues they should be reviewed alongside the settlement hierarchy and spatial strategy to reflect the new Local Plan. They emphasise that boundaries should not act as inflexible constraints preventing sustainable development opportunities from being considered. The response highlights the need to distinguish between isolated rural sites and locations closely linked to existing settlements, transport infrastructure or railway stations. It advocates a positive approach to growth in sustainable, well-connected settlements, particularly rail-connected locations such as Plumley, where carefully planned development could support sustainable travel and strengthen local communities.

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Development in the countryside

Representation ID: 6553

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

The respondent supports retaining settlement boundaries as a tool for managing development but argues they should be reviewed alongside the settlement hierarchy and spatial strategy to reflect the new Local Plan. They emphasise that boundaries should not act as inflexible constraints preventing sustainable development opportunities from being considered. The response highlights the need to distinguish between isolated rural sites and locations closely linked to existing settlements, transport infrastructure or railway stations. It advocates a positive approach to growth in sustainable, well-connected settlements, particularly rail-connected locations such as Plumley, where carefully planned development could support sustainable travel and strengthen local communities.

Comment

Local plan scoping consultation

Housing

Representation ID: 6554

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Deloitte

Representation Summary:

The respondent supports addressing a wide range of housing needs through the Local Plan, including affordable housing, housing mix, specialist accommodation and self-build housing. They argue that housing policies should be informed by evidence on need, viability and infrastructure, ensuring requirements remain deliverable. The response supports increasing affordable housing provision but emphasises that policy expectations should be tested against viability evidence. It highlights the potential for both small and strategic sites to deliver a range of housing types and tenures. Smaller sites are seen as supporting early delivery and housing diversity, while larger developments could provide mixed communities, affordable housing and specialist accommodation.

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