Comment

Representation ID: 2913

Received: 21/08/2025

Respondent: Ian Madej

I&O_3087
Partially. The range is broadly right, but key constraints evidence is missing or under-developed, which makes it unsound to keep sites like NOR11 (Weaverham West) in the options pool. The evidence base should be strengthened in the following areas: A) Habitats & Biodiversity (HRA-aligned) Appropriate Assessment-level data for the Northwich/Weaverham area (as screening already flags Likely Significant Effects): Functionally Linked Land (FLL) surveys : two full winters of vantage-point and transect surveys for golden plover, lapwing and other SPA species; integrate WeBS data and bird atlas records. Visitor pressure baseline and access management strategy for the Mersey Estuary SPA/Ramsar (recreation disturbance pathway). Air quality dispersion modelling (NOx/NH₃, deposition) for designated sites, with in-combination traffic growth. Water quality/hydrology : receiving water body pathways from Weaverham to the Weaver/Mersey ; WWTW permit headroom , tightening limits, and WFD status ; nutrient loading and SuDS feasibility (infiltration, groundwater levels). Tie site appraisal to the Local Nature Recovery Strategy (LNRS) : hedgerow networks, field margins, and on-site 10% BNG feasibility (habitat baselines quantified per UKHab, realistic unit generation, and long-term stewardship plan). B) Green Belt / “Grey Belt” Tests (NPPF Dec 2024) A parcel-level Green Belt harm assessment that: Scores openness , visual containment , and five purposes (esp. checking sprawl, preventing Weaverham–Acton Bridge coalescence, preserving historic setting). Distinguishes true previously developed land from open countryside. Applies the “Grey Belt” filter correctly: only land of least harm and limited environmental value should pass (most open farmland will not). A compensatory improvements framework (public access, biodiversity, landscape) with deliverable, costed measures —not generic statements. A Brownfield/Urban Capacity Study (refresh) with density assumptions, town-centre living, and mixed-use intensification so Green Belt is not released prematurely. C) Transport, Air Quality & Corridor Modelling Cumulative highway modelling for the A49/A556 and Winnington/Barnton bridges corridor (AM/PM peaks, queue lengths, safety/accident data, and air quality at receptors), including NOR11 and other pipeline growth. A Station Accessibility & Catchment Audit for Acton Bridge : Service frequency/first–last trains and realistic mode share. Last-mile safety : continuous, lit footways/cycle routes from NOR11; crossing quality on A-roads; gradient and severance checks. Parking supply and displacement analysis; bus–rail timetable integration. AQ modelling linked to HRA (NOx, NH₃ deposition to European sites) with in-combination scenarios. D) Social & Physical Infrastructure Capacity Education : current rolls, forecasting, site availability for expansions, capital and revenue costs, and deliverability horizons. Primary care : ICS input on GP capacity, premises constraints, funding route and timing. Utilities : potable water headroom, wastewater network/WWTW upgrade needs and timescales, electricity reinforcement, digital connectivity. Flood risk & drainage : SFRA Level 2 for edge sites; surface-water flow paths; downstream impact modelling; adoption/maintenance of SuDS. Heritage & Landscape : setting appraisals (e.g., St Mary’s, Grade I ); ZTV /key view analysis; dark skies; PROW/green infrastructure connectivity. E) Viability & Delivery (cost realism) A whole-plan viability that fully internalises : Strategic and local highways works; active travel networks; bus service revenue support (multi-year). Education/health contributions; BNG (≥10%) creation and 30-year management; Green Belt compensatory improvements . Surface water infrastructure; utilities reinforcements; heritage/landscape mitigation; carbon/energy measures. Delivery trajectory & market absorption for town-centre and brownfield first, to avoid contrived pressure for Green Belt release. F) Agricultural Land & Soils Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) at site scale to confirm BMV (Grades 1/2/3a) loss risk. Soil carbon /peat risk mapping; Hedgerows Regulations audits (importance tests) and mitigation feasibility.

Comment

Representation ID: 2922

Received: 21/08/2025

Respondent: David Macfadyen

I&O_3096
yes

Comment

Representation ID: 2956

Received: 21/08/2025

Respondent: Beryl Prior

I&O_3130
The current amenities both social and educational are currently inadequste.  More housing will add further pressure  on schools, medical facilites and the almost non existant recreational facilities for children.  this must be seriously assessed before any further pressure is added

Comment

Representation ID: 3080

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: National Highways

I&O_3254
Overview The approach identified in streamlining the process of the updated Local Plan from the existing Part One and Part Two documents is viewed as allowing a comprehensive document which is reflective of current relevant National Policies and approaches. We are supportive of this presented approach. It is noted that the Cheshire West and Chester Local Plan is progressing ahead of the devolution of CWaC, CEC, and WBC and, as such, the forthcoming publication will stand alone outside of this process and should be considered within this view. As per the DfT Circular 01/2022, we are prescribed by the NPPF to be considered “from the earliest stages of plan-making and in development proposals so that sustainable transport can be promoted”. We consider this review of the Regulation 18 document to form part of this early engagement. National Development Management Policies The Levelling-Up and Regeneration Bill, the mechanism under which the NDMPs will be implemented, is currently undergoing consultation and has not been finalised. We recognise that once this is complete, the NPPF will be updated to reflect this new approach to planning. As and when the Levelling-Up and Regeneration Bill comes into effect (and relevant guidance is updated), we expect the Local Plan to be updated as appropriate. Design Code The design code might influence how development proposals address matters such as access, layout and visual impact for sites near or adjacent to SRN corridors. Therefore, it is important to ensure that the design principles align with national infrastructure standards, and do not compromise the safety, efficiency or operation of the SRN. We recommend being open to consultation on both the design code and any subsequent proposals where the design of new or modified infrastructure may interact with, or be within the vicinity of, the SRN. Evidence Base As the identified supporting documents are developed and prepared in support of the forthcoming Local Plan, we expect that these will be referenced in the Regulation 19 documentation prior to publication of the full Plan. We recommend being consulted on any aspects of the evidence and documentation where impacts to the SRN may occur.

Comment

Representation ID: 3215

Received: 22/08/2025

Respondent: Antony Fairbanks

I&O_3389
Yes, and transport is particualrly important considering the high requirmeent of mobility of people living in newly created accomodation to places of work.

Comment

Representation ID: 3274

Received: 22/08/2025

Respondent: claire hepworth

I&O_3448
Protecting green belt and greenfield should be a primary principle. Rural villages of Willaston and Hooton, as they cannot sustain increased housing plans. Protecting green areas/greenfield should be a primary principle and protecting . Green field sites store carbon in soil/hedgerows and trees- building on these means loss of carbon sinks and release of stored carbon. Green field and green belt land is climate change infrastructure. We have a climate emergency, need to reduce carbon emissions and improve biodiversity.

Comment

Representation ID: 3366

Received: 22/08/2025

Respondent: John Edward Holmes

I&O_3540
All listed are relevant Any housing needs assessment should look at the unmet needs in the area to ensure adequate provision for people on low incomes. There has been a lot of house building of large detached houses which may be profitable for the house builder but do little for meeting the needs of people on waiting lists for rented homes The plan should include an assessment of the development of empty / unused / derelict sites, sites with existing permissions that have not been developed and the utilisation of brownfield sites before green belt land is considered for development. Transport assessments should look at real congestion (ie surveys should be completed during school times not in school holidays). Additionally it should not just look at averages over a week or month but look at congestion at peak times and how that will be effected by fresh development. Public transport usage should be examined, improved and encouraged. Any aseesmnent should look at likley realistic expected use of public transport not idealised scenarios.      

Comment

Representation ID: 3388

Received: 22/08/2025

Respondent: Gary Nunn

Question IN 1
I&O_3562
I would also like to see an assessment made of the potential for a new village(s)/town in the CWAC area to be undertaken, to meet a significant portion of future housing needs and, thereby, alleviate pressure on existing infrastructure.

Comment

Representation ID: 3504

Received: 22/08/2025

Respondent: Deryn O'Connor

I&O_3678
Yes although consideration of business development or new areas of business, factories etc and where they are to be developed should be made. People like to live near to work and need to consider how they will get there

Comment

Representation ID: 3598

Received: 23/08/2025

Respondent: Miss Kerrie Pimm

I&O_3780
Brownfield land should be used for development, not Green Belt.

Comment

Representation ID: 3602

Received: 23/08/2025

Respondent: Nigel Miller

IN1
I&O_3784
This is the right evidence

Comment

Representation ID: 3774

Received: 25/08/2025

Respondent: ROBERT MCSWEENEY

I&O_3956
Little Leigh Parish Council believes that the appropriate evidence is listed.

Comment

Representation ID: 3785

Received: 23/08/2025

Respondent: Chris Kohut

I&O_3967
Seeing as though the majority of information is stated as either being "to be prepared" or "in preperation" there is not alot in this section to comment on.  My preference is to retain the greenbelt with no further developments in cuddington and sandiway. 

Comment

Representation ID: 3789

Received: 23/08/2025

Respondent: Toby Hazlehurst

I&O_3971
The only improvements Chester needs is transport improvements. Specifically road improvements. All the other stuff listed doesn't need changing and will be a waste of public money to do. 

Comment

Representation ID: 3790

Received: 23/08/2025

Respondent: Judith Ross

I&O_3972
I think that the borough should prepare a comprehensive urban capacity study to identify brownfield land in the urban areas and opportunities for intensification of existing housing delevopments, these would particularly be in areas with good public transport or with the potential to provide good walking and cycling to reduce the need for travel, and to regenerate left behind urban communities.

Comment

Representation ID: 3853

Received: 24/08/2025

Respondent: Susan Proctor

I&O_4035
Register of all land currently in agricultural use. Cheshire has diverse industries and Agriculture is an important part of the county's character and its economy, I would hope that somewhere there is a regular review of the amount of land used for farming tos ee whether it is being maintained or reduced. 

Comment

Representation ID: 3879

Received: 24/08/2025

Respondent: Janet Hooke

I&O_4061
Additional evidence on water supply and on sewage treatment availability and capability needed. Not clear if it is in infrastructure. 

Comment

Representation ID: 4054

Received: 24/08/2025

Respondent: Jean Ditchfield

I&O_4262
Does the council have a full register of all brownfield sites that could be utilised before any previously undeveloped sites are considered. Would they also have any other sites currently not utilised or standing empty that can be considered for change of use and development eg empty retail units due to the change in way people now shop and closures due to cost incurred for businesses. Many of these would be in positions much closer to existing facilities and transport links therefore lessening the potential impact on the environment and air quality.

Comment

Representation ID: 4055

Received: 24/08/2025

Respondent: Simon Ditchfield

I&O_4263
Does the council have a full register of all brownfield sites that could be utilised before any previously undeveloped sites are considered. Would they also have any other sites currently not utilised or standing empty that can be considered for change of use and development eg empty retail units due to the change in way people now shop and closures due to cost incurred for businesses. Many of these would be in positions much closer to existing facilities and transport links therefore lessening the potential impact on the environment and air quality.

Comment

Representation ID: 4058

Received: 24/08/2025

Respondent: Ruth Hair

I&O_4266
NO Urban capacity study should be carried out to identify brown sites which can be utilised for housing

Comment

Representation ID: 4071

Received: 25/08/2025

Respondent: Gillian Lycett

IN 1
I&O_4279
There is no mention of the following importanat factors to consider as part of this consultation: Conservation Areas or areas of historical significance,   Local Landscape designations: Areas of Special County Value Any reference to Site of Special Scientific Interest ( SSSI ) designations. Any reference to Special Protection Area (SPA) designated areas for the protection of birds in the UK,  classified under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.    Any reference to Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) designated areas and their protection in the UK under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017     

Comment

Representation ID: 4096

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Jon Cole

I&O_4324
There needs to be an assessment of the critical (national) infrastructure, that is water, gas, and electricity distribution, to ensure that existing infrastrcuture can cope with any proposed changes. For example, in Frodsham (Overton specifically) it is common to experience power cuts so it is questionable whether increasing the number of houses (and electric cars) will be sustainable. The power and water consumption of proposed Data Centres in the north west will also place a strain on the wider critical infrastructure that will impact the sustainability of expanding housing in the region. Each data centre allegedly uses the fresh water of a town containing 50,000 to 60,000 people. Is there going to be enough water to go around given the repeated problems that United Utilities report about reservoir levels for the North West.  

Comment

Representation ID: 4273

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Chris Cowell

I&O_4502
I don't understand how a meaningful consultation can take place when so many of the evidence documents are not yet available.

Comment

Representation ID: 4283

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: David Rudd

I&O_4512
Individual village and parish Neighbourhood Plans should be included

Comment

Representation ID: 4405

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Barnton Parish Council

I&O_4637
yes BUT subject to new policies regarding maintenance of village identities  and infrastructure delelopment plan

Comment

Representation ID: 4472

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Jannette Linford

I&O_4735

Comment

Representation ID: 4599

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: William Barry

I&O_4885
This evidence should be supplemented by road traffic forecasts, as sustainability corridors are only considering rail users when looking at mobility. 

Comment

Representation ID: 4639

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Fiona Barry

I&O_4929
IN1 There is no mention of the number of empty properties within the borough, which may number several thousand. This information is relevant as those properties could quickly be brought back into use, far more quickly than waiting for homes to be built.

Comment

Representation ID: 4695

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: victoria rigby

I&O_5004
It would also be good to look at school places and medical access

Comment

Representation ID: 4732

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Laura Holden

I&O_5055
While I feel broadly is the right evidence that would be needed, as it states the Green Belt analysis is yet to be completed, I do not feel it should go any further at this stage without that