Thank you to all residents (members and non-members) that filled our community centre hall on 29th October, just a few days before the CWaC Local Plan deadline for representations. Fifty-one representations were hand delivered to CWaC the following day, and we know many more of you submitted via post directly or used email. At a last count on the CWaC portal, over 500 representations had been received, and based on some name checking I don’t think this is all of them yet…

Keep in touch,

Mark Sams

Westminster Park’s local wildlife includes Great Crested Newts have been seen in both Winkwell Field and the marl pits in the Greenbelt land that the Council wish to handover to developers.

Great Crested Newts are internationally important species of conservation concern as described on this Cheshire Biodiversity web site – http://www.cheshire-biodiversity.org.uk/action-plans/listing.php?id=34

Specific actions plans for Great Crested Newt conservation are documented at http://ukbars.defra.gov.uk/archive/plans/lbap_complete_plan.asp?X={5C19A854-E33D-459E-98A2-DD28A91EE8BB}&LBAP={2CF2A1EE-9AE6-4436-ABA7-21E8B659574D}&CO=

There is no evidence in the Local Plan for conservation or an impact assessment for bio-diversity when re-designating this Greenbelt land, i.e. a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

NOTE: There is a ‘Habitats Regulations Assessment Screening Report – June 2013.pdf” as a part of the plan, but it does NOT cover the Greenbelt land next to Wrexham Road and the importance of the marl pits to our Great Crested Newts.

You have until 5pm tomorrow to save our Great Crested Newts – Please send this additional information (below) to spatialplanning@cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk

Dear Spatial Planning Team,

The local plan is NOT LEGALLY COMPLIANT because there is no evidence in the Local Plan that a Habitats Regulations Assessment has been carried out in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 given that Great Crested Newts are known by residents to be living in the marl pits on this Greenbelt land.

Kind Regards,

<Full name>

<Full Address>

<Post Code>

Following our Local Plan meeting tonight at the Community Centre, please find below an updated letter with reasons why the Local Plan is not legally compliant:

Download (DOC, 33KB)

Evidence that the housing requirement in the local plan has been inflated in the last stages of preparation…

This is the latest (2013) draft plan for Dee Valley water plans for water supply requirements for the local plan period.

The link for appendix E is via their web site:

http://www.deevalleywater.co.uk/article.php?id=129

Check out their population estimations and point 2.4 the required need for Chester from the chief planner.  Interestingly it also includes information for Flintshire, Denbighshire and Wrexham.

Download (PDF, 491KB)

Click here to submit a response

You will see this screen:

Click Login/Register, then register using the button marked ‘register’.

Choose Register as Consultee…

Fill in and complete registration –

write down password if needed and press OK…

Confirm your email address, and then proceed to update your contact details and submit comments…

You can respond now via email to spatialplanning@cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk

<Write your Name and address incl. postcode>

Dear Mr. Owens,

I object to the re-designation of any Green Belt land as part of the CWaC local plan.

“The draft local development plan is unsound because:”

1)            There is no justification for re-designating Green Belt land for housing. The assessment of the number of new homes required is deeply flawed and is ‘dwelling-led’ rather than based on evidenced needs. The result is a housing target of more than twice that determined by the Dept of Communities and Local Government‘s projected increase in households..  It is not based on ‘proportionate’ evidence.

2)            There is no justification for the “ambitious”  growth targets which do not enjoy public support. The results of what little consultation there has been with the public have been ignored. They are well above any historical or natural levels and are not deliverable.

3)            There is no justification because the plans are disproportionate to the need.  The Strategic Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) shows that there is no shortage of land availability over the 20 year period. The Green Belt should not be dismembered for a ‘perceived’ shortage over the very short term.

4)            It is not positively prepared as there is no evidence of co-operation (as required in the planning guidance) with neighbouring authorities.

5)            It is not effective as there is no evidence of joint working on cross boundary strategic priorities.

6)            It is not consistent with the NPPF and national planning guidelines in its lack of use of secondary nationally produced data.

7)            It is not positively prepared in that it fails to address the issues of waste treatment capacity, traffic congestion, water supply etc with neighbouring authorities.

8)            The plan is not effective as it has not been demonstrated that the plan can be delivered.  It is simply not a credible plan given recorded past delivery levels and the latest demographic changes recorded by the ONS indicate.

The case for re-designating any Green-Belt has not been made.  We cannot understand why this Authority is encouraging the development of Green-Belt land and countryside, against the wishes of the community rather than primarily utilising all available Brownfield land as demanded by the National Planning Framework      …who are they representing ? 

Sign & Date

email :

spatialplanning@cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk

… or send to:

Spatial Planning, The Forum Offices, Chester CH12HS

Updated 28/10/2013 – Whichever form your representation takes, you must link all your points to the below questions of legal compliance and soundness.

Legal Compliance

For the Local Plan to be considered legally compliant, the following needs to be determined:

• Whether the Local Plan is detailed in the current Local Development Scheme (LDS) and that the key stages have been followed.
• That community involvement has been carried out in accordance with the current Statement of Community Involvement (SCI).
• Whether the Local Plan makes satisfactory regard to the Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS).
• That the Local Plan complies with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended).
• That the Local Plan complies with the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.
• That a Sustainability Appraisal Report (SA) is published to accompany the Local Plan and is adequate.
• That the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) is carried out in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (The Habitats Regulations) 2010.
• That the Local Plan has regard to national planning policy.
• That Section 110 of the Localism Act 2011 (Duty to Co-operate) has been complied with.

Do yo consider the Local Plan to be legally compliant?

1. Yes
2. No

Soundness

Paragraph 182 of the National Planning Policy Framework sets out the considerations in relation to a plan being considered ‘sound’.

• Positively prepared – the plan should be prepared based on a strategy which seeks to meet objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements, including unmet requirements from neighbouring authorities where it is reasonable to do so and consistent with achieving sustainable development;
• Justified – the plan should be the most appropriate strategy, when considered against the reasonable alternatives, based on proportionate evidence;
• Effective – the plan should be deliverable over its period and based on effective joint working on cross-boundary strategic priorities;
• Consistent with national policy – the plan should enable the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with the policies in the NPPF.

Do you consider the Local Plan is ‘unsound’ because it is not:

1. Positively prepared
2. Justified
3. Effective
4. Consistent with national planning policy

Download (PDF, 250KB)