Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 6587

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Gladman Developments Ltd (Gladman) welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Scoping consultation for the Cheshire East Local Plan. Gladman has several land interests within the borough that have been submitted to Cheshire East Council (the Council) for consideration for residential development through previous Call for Sites exercises. These include:
• Land off Audlem Road, Audlem (references: HE 101, CFS26 479 and 26/2386/OUT)
• Land off Macclesfield Road, Congleton (references: HE 150 and CFS26 495)
• Land off Waggs Road, Congleton (references: HE 151 and CFS26 509)
• Land off Sandbach Road, Congleton (references: HE 113 and CFS26 561)
• Land off Hind Heath Road, Sandbach (references: HE 149 and CFS26 529)
Gladman is keen to engage further with the Council regarding these land interests as the plan making process progresses.

Comment

Representation ID: 6588

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Gladman notes that the Scoping consultation provides communities and stakeholders with an early opportunity to influence the content of the Local Plan and future engagement arrangements. They outline requirements for consultation with appropriate general and specific consultation bodies and for feedback to inform the community engagement strategy. Gladman notes that the Council’s six-week consultation, runs from 21 July to 1 September 2026, and precedes the anticipated Gateway 1 self-assessment summary on 30 October 2026. The representation then identifies a series of key planning topics that Gladman considers should be addressed through preparation of the new Local Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 6589

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Gladman submits that the emerging Local Plan’s vision and objectives should include an explicit commitment to meeting the borough’s current and future housing needs in full. This would provide a clear and unequivocal framework for addressing housing needs over the plan period.

Comment

Representation ID: 6590

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Gladman supports retaining the proposed Local Plan period to 2045, which they consider would comply with national policy if the Plan is adopted in 2029. They caution that delays during plan preparation and examination are common and recommend that any shortened plan period should cover at least 13 years to provide sufficient contingency while meeting the national minimum. Gladman considers the Council should account for potential extensions to the examination process and other delays when determining the timeframe. They also highlight national policy allowing longer plan periods where necessary to support strategic development or infrastructure and recommend considering whether this justifies extending the Plan period.

Comment

Representation ID: 6594

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Gladman considers the Local Plan should meet at least the standard-method housing need of 2,531 dwellings per annum and explore higher growth to address affordable housing, neighbouring authorities’ needs and economic or infrastructure ambitions. They recommend providing additional flexibility through a 10-20% housing land supply buffer and applying a non-implementation allowance. Gladman advocates allocating sufficient sites of varying sizes rather than relying on windfalls, with robust evidence required for any existing allocations carried forward. They emphasise maintaining balanced housing delivery throughout the Plan period, avoiding excessive reliance on large strategic sites and ensuring a diverse, deliverable portfolio capable of responding to delays and changing circumstances.

Comment

Representation ID: 6596

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Gladman supports the establishment of a settlement hierarchy for the borough, as it can help inform the spatial distribution of development, the approach to site allocations and the definition of settlement boundaries. A robust settlement hierarchy allows for housing growth to be directed across the borough to all appropriate settlements. Gladman agrees with the Council that the existing settlement hierarchy should be reviewed to establish its effectiveness for the emerging plan period. The Council should consider how new residential developments can help to enhance the role, function and sustainability of settlements, including by maintaining and enhancing the vitality and viability of existing facilities and services, providing new local amenities and delivering improved infrastructure.

Comment

Representation ID: 6598

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

The Council rightly acknowledges that a range of factors will influence the spatial distribution of development. In order to meet the borough’s identified housing needs, Gladman agrees with the Council that a combination of growth options may be required. Gladman submits that the primary growth strategy should be to direct new housing to the edge of towns and villages. The settlement hierarchy should be used to direct housing growth across the borough, with the level of growth allocated to a settlement being proportionate to its size, role and sustainability. Based on the existing settlement hierarchy, Gladman considers that the Principal Towns, Key Service Centres and Local Service Centres should accommodate housing growth over the emerging plan period.

Comment

Representation ID: 6601

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Gladman supports a borough-wide Green Belt Assessment to identify Grey Belt land and inform potential changes to Green Belt boundaries. They consider the assessment should follow national policy and determine whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify Green Belt release for housing growth. Gladman highlights that exceptional circumstances may not be required when altering Green Belt boundaries for suitable land around well-connected stations identified for development through the spatial strategy. Where Green Belt release is necessary to meet development needs, they consider the Council should apply the sequential approach established by national policy. Overall, Green Belt decisions should be evidence-led and integrated with the emerging spatial strategy.

Comment

Representation ID: 6603

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Gladman submits that the Council should review the boundaries of the Strategic Green Gaps to ascertain whether there is scope to allocate land for new homes without undermining their function. Whilst the Strategic Green Gaps play an important role, their function should be balanced against the requirement to meet the borough’s identified housing needs in full. Given that the Strategic Green Gaps represent a significant policy constraint, the Council should ensure that their extent and boundaries are robustly evidenced so that land capable of accommodating sustainable development is not unnecessarily constrained.

Comment

Representation ID: 6604

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Gladman recommends a flexible and permissive countryside policy allowing sustainable residential development on suitable greenfield sites outside defined built-up areas. They consider this would enable windfall housing to contribute towards meeting housing requirements and help address housing land supply shortfalls without requiring departures from the Local Plan. The Council would retain the ability to refuse proposals considered unsustainable while having greater control over the location of development. Gladman cites policies in the Ashford Local Plan and County Durham Plan as examples of approaches supporting appropriate development on unallocated sites adjoining, close to, or otherwise well related to existing settlements, subject to relevant planning criteria.