Comment

Representation ID: 60

Received: 07/07/2025

Respondent: Mr Martin Smith

3.2
I&O_65
3.2 Option A is the right choice. It provides continuity with the existing Local Plan and is inherently aligned with the three key dimensions of sustainability. Critically this option gives real focus to outcomes that will directly deliver benefits to our local community.

Comment

Representation ID: 92

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Neil Cockburn

Option for new local plan
I&O_113
Option B

Comment

Representation ID: 122

Received: 14/07/2025

Respondent: Mike Mather

I&O_144
A- even though it's just a massive word salad with no measurabke targets or accountability. Millions spend already writing it and now the option is scrap it in favour of a different but 'sustainable' word salad. No doubt the next one will be 'AI'?  Just focus on the small number of important areas that will improve peoples lives and deliver them!
Option A - take forward current Local Plan Objectives

Comment

Representation ID: 258

Received: 17/07/2025

Respondent: Suzanne Rimmer

I&O_288
C

Comment

Representation ID: 297

Received: 21/07/2025

Respondent: Tim Ashcroft

I&O_328
Must it be either or? It needs to be linked to the challenges and barriers to decide what needs prioritising.

Comment

Representation ID: 358

Received: 16/07/2025

Respondent: Ms Nadine Smith

I&O_390

Option A - take forward current Local Plan Objectives

Comment

Representation ID: 383

Received: 26/07/2025

Respondent: Paul Holden

I&O_458
Option A

Comment

Representation ID: 484

Received: 27/07/2025

Respondent: M L Jeal

I&O_567
Option A
Option A - take forward current Local Plan Objectives

Comment

Representation ID: 814

Received: 05/08/2025

Respondent: Ian Dale

I&O_918
Option A

Comment

Representation ID: 967

Received: 05/08/2025

Respondent: Julie Smith

I&O_1071
C where is the option to protect the greenbelt. Failure to do so will compromise all principles

Comment

Representation ID: 1042

Received: 06/08/2025

Respondent: Suzanne Turner

I&O_1147
Option A

Comment

Representation ID: 1628

Received: 12/08/2025

Respondent: Roberta Pomponio

I&O_1738
Neither Option A nor Option B should be adopted wholesale. Option A provides a broader strategic vision and recognises the social and economic context of Cheshire West and Chester, but some objectives need modernisation to reflect climate targets, health priorities, and the realities of infrastructure capacity. Option B offers more precise environmental safeguards but is narrower in scope and risks underplaying the importance of place-making, heritage, and balanced community growth. The most effective approach would be to combine the strengths of both , ensuring the new Local Plan is grounded in sustainability principles while remaining locally distinctive and socially balanced.

Comment

Representation ID: 1717

Received: 12/08/2025

Respondent: Eleanor Gorsuch

I&O_1827
OPTION A

Comment

Representation ID: 1769

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Michael Byrne

I&O_1879
If it's not broken, don't fix it.  Stick with option A.

Comment

Representation ID: 1874

Received: 14/08/2025

Respondent: Ashton Hayes Parish Council

I&O_1986
A

Comment

Representation ID: 1955

Received: 14/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Jon Parry

I&O_2067
The greenbelt should not be weakened nor reduced. Is is completely innapropriate to reduce greenbelt further 

Comment

Representation ID: 1973

Received: 14/08/2025

Respondent: Adam Pyne

I&O_2089
Option A

Comment

Representation ID: 2052

Received: 15/08/2025

Respondent: MCI Developments Ltd

I&O_2172
Whilst the Council may wish to look at the objectives of the current Local Plan and the Sustainability Appraisal, any objectives prepared should be specific this Plan and address the issues and challenges that are current in Cheshire West. Taking forward the current Local Plan objectives may result in a plan which is outdated and not relevant to the current and future needs of Cheshire West and Chester.

Comment

Representation ID: 2090

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Colin Steen

I&O_2210
SA/SEA should also include an environmental assessment on the impact on peoples’ health and well-being.  In addition the Cheshire West and Chester Local Plan Issues and Options  Habitats Regulation Assessment Initial Screening document does not address areas within Cheshire West and Chester.  It looks at areas around the County and there is no mention of areas of environmental importance within the County.  Therefore this document is not relevant to be considered in the Sustainability Appraisal of the Local Plan.  A further SA/SEA assessment needs to be made of Cheshire West and Chester and NOT the surrounding areas.
Option B - use the Sustainability Appraisal objectives

Comment

Representation ID: 2202

Received: 15/08/2025

Respondent: Sue Stanley

I&O_2322
I support Option B to use the Sustainability Appraisal Obejctives

Comment

Representation ID: 2275

Received: 17/08/2025

Respondent: Peter Manning

I&O_2404
a.

Comment

Representation ID: 2309

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: claire hepworth

I&O_2438
Option A with amendments to explicitly protect smaller villages like Williston and Hooton and green spaces/greenfield. Willaston and Hotton are already overstretched

Comment

Representation ID: 2398

Received: 18/08/2025

Respondent: Jack Hubert Mayhew

I&O_2527
Option c

Comment

Representation ID: 2424

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Mary Clarke

I&O_2553
I suggest that both criteria are given equal weight.  It is not beyond the local authority to apply checks and balances to ensure that both premises are considered. It will also be important to act with flexibility and to respond to changes and developments that arise during the lifetime of the plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 2562

Received: 14/08/2025

Respondent: Mersey Rivers Trust

I&O_2715
On balance, we have a preference for Option B.
Option B - use the Sustainability Appraisal objectives

Comment

Representation ID: 2672

Received: 19/08/2025

Respondent: Anne Salmon

I&O_2825
Option B

Comment

Representation ID: 2703

Received: 20/08/2025

Respondent: Clare Birtles

I&O_2859
C

Comment

Representation ID: 2727

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Adrian Thiemicke

Question OB 1
I&O_2885
This question does not tally with the options under Spatial Strategy, which has 3 options, compared with 2 here (whose letters don't even tally). Neither of the 2 options suggested here are suitable. The preferred option is to protect and not weaken the Green Belt.

Comment

Representation ID: 2760

Received: 20/08/2025

Respondent: Sarah Cooke

I&O_2929
Neither include protection of the green belt - this is a significant ommission in the objectives

Comment

Representation ID: 2840

Received: 21/08/2025

Respondent: Peter Webb

I&O_3010
Option A