Comment

Representation ID: 10489

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Clare Pleasant

I&O_10987


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10492

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Helen Gabriel

I&O_10990
Option A – Retain the Green Belt. I strongly urge the Council to uphold the purpose of Green Belt designation, prioritise brownfield and genuinely sustainable development opportunities, and ensure alignment with both local policy and the NPPF. Protecting the Green Belt is not only about safeguarding policy principles but also about preserving community wellbeing and environmental sustainability for future generations.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10493

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Roman Wieckowski

SS 11
I&O_10991
Please accept this email as my response to the consultation regarding proposed planning in Northwich. Regarding Question SS11, my preferred choice is for “Option A - Retain the Green Belt”.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10494

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Emma Fielder

I&O_10992
In response to question SS 11, I support the retention of the green belt.   

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10495

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Hollie Reid

SS 11
I&O_10993
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate. I am answering *Question SS 11* and my choice is: *Option A – Retain the Green Belt*

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10496

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Robert Hamilton

I&O_10994
I have seen the widely shared schematic plan of the proposals which I assume accompanies the consultation document and wish to object to the swallowing up of yet more Cheshire green belt to housing. These sites are an easy target and what has already occurred in Northwich will be repeated. I refer to the lack of road improvements as promised along with all the other supporting infrastructure promised but never delivered.  I wish to answer the question within the consultation document SS11 Option A. Retain the Green Belt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10497

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Gill Price

I&O_10995
In response to Question SS 11 , I very strongly support the retention of the Green Belt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10498

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Anthony Andrews

I&O_10996
I am emailing you with regards to the proposed housing areas surrounding Weaverham village. (NOR10, NOR11, NOR12) In answer to question SS11- I would like to choose option A- Retaining Green Belt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10500

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Marion Forshaw

I&O_10998
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in Neston and Parkgate  I am answering Question SS 11 and my choice is: � Option A – Retain the Green Belt

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10501

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Louise de Lima

SS11
I&O_10999
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate. I am answering *Question SS 11* and my choice is: *Option A – Retain the Green Belt*

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10502

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Mike Foo

I&O_11000
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate. I am answering *Question SS 11* and my choice is: *Option A – Retain the Green Belt*

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10506

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Adam Sanders

I&O_11004
I strongly support Option A – Retain the Green Belt. This is the only option that genuinely safeguards our countryside and preserves the unique character of our local area.   My reasons are as follows:  - Protection of countryside and wildlife: The Green Belt provides essential habitats for a wide range of wildlife species and acts as a natural buffer against overdevelopment. Losing this would cause irreversible environmental harm.  - Support for farmers: Agricultural land within the Green Belt underpins the local economy and our food security. Once lost to development, it cannot be replaced.  - Inadequate road infrastructure near Barnton: The current road network is already under significant pressure, particularly at peak times, and worse since Winnington developments. Additional housing would worsen congestion and road safety concerns. The swing bridge is intolerable to cross due to traffic. - Strain on public services: Local schools and doctors’ surgeries are already at or near capacity. Increased population from large-scale development would place unacceptable strain on these essential services.    - Traffic into Northwich town centre: Congestion is already a major issue, particularly during rush hours. Further development would exacerbate this and impact air quality.   - Existing public transport is limited: the nearest train station is not easily accessible for many residents. Infrastructure and services would not be able to absorb the significant extra demand without major investment, which is not currently planned.   In summary, I urge the council to adopt Option A in full, and to reject proposals that would remove land from the Green Belt or promote unsustainable housing developments in and around Barnton.  

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10507

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Lorraine Watkins-Duffett

SS11
I&O_11005
Having been made aware of the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate, I am writing to express my deep concerns over the plans. I am strongly opposed to the proposal. In answer to *Question SS 11* my choice is: *Option A – Retain the Green Belt* Yours faithfully,

Comment

Representation ID: 10508

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Timothy Leather

I&O_11006
I am emailing you with regards to the proposed housing areas surrounding Weaverham village. (NOR10, NOR11, NOR12) In answer to question SS 11, I would like choose Option A-  Retaining Green Belt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10509

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Catherine Priestley

I&O_11007
Answer –  Option A – Retain the Green Belt There are many reasons to retain the green belt, and I have highlighted below the main points in support of this option. Environmental protection Biodiversity – green belts provide habitats for wildlife, protects eco systems and supports pollinators which are essential for food growth and production Mitigating climate change – Trees and soil store carbon which helps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions Maintaining air quality – vegetation filters pollutants lowering pollution levels in surrounding urban areas Flood Prevention – Green spaces absorb rainwater and reduce flood risks far more efficiently than built surfaces Urban Planning Benefits Green belts prevent uncontrolled expansion of towns and cities and mitigates “sprawl” Efficient Land Use – Redevelopment of underused urban land can achieve more long-term gains for a community than consuming countryside Green belt protects the identity of towns and villages stopping them merging into one continuous urban mass with poorly funded infrastructure Health and Well Being Access to nature provides residents with green space for walking, cycling and recreation Mental Health – Proximity to natural environments reduces stress and improves mental well being Public Health – Cleaner air, less noise, pollution, and opportunities for an active lifestyle reduces health inequalities Food and Agriculture Local Farming protects farmland for food production close to cities and reducing reliance on long supply chains Allotments and Community growing encourages food security and resilience Economic and Social Value Tourism and Leisure – attractive landscapes support local economies through recreation and tourism Property values – Homes near green belt land often retain higher values due to the quality of the environment Long term sustainability – Short-term housing gains from building on green belts undermine long term ecological, social, and economic sustainability

Comment

Representation ID: 10512

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Sue Jones

I&O_11010
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate. I am answering *Question SS 11* and my choice is: *Option A – Retain the Green Belt*  I also fail to see why this area would need the amount of proposed houses and there would need to be huge improvements in the infrastructure, doctors, hospitals, schools etc to cope. Also the local roads would be a complete nightmare with the huge number of extra cars it would bring. Please listen to our concerns, once our countryside has gone it is gone for ever

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10513

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Victoria Marsden

I&O_11011
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate. I am answering Question SS 11 and my choice is: Option A – Retain the Green Belt

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10514

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Josh Bennett

I&O_11012
Option A SS11 retain the green belt is preferred, and we object to that land being built on.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10515

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Rob Pilbrow

I&O_11013
My answer is A: Retain the green belt

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10517

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Rebecca Macaulay

I&O_11015
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate.  I am answering *Question SS 11* and my choice is: *Option A – Retain the Green Belt*  

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10518

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Irfan Bahadir Onder

SS11
I&O_11016
To whom It may concern, In response to Question SS 11, I support the retention of the green belt. With Regards, Irfan Bahadir ONDER

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10519

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Graham Cobden

I&O_11017


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10537

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Christina Broadbent

I&O_11035
I am writing in response to the local plan July 25 document in relation to houses being built on green belt land by Barnton, Cheshire  In answer to Question SS 11 I would like Option A – Retain the Green Belt I do not believe that our local area is set up to cope with such numbers of housing and it would dramatically impact local wildlife  There are other much more suitable brown belts where housing could be built   

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10538

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Caitlin Broadbent

I&O_11036
I am writing in response to the local plan July 25 document in relation to houses being built on green belt land by Barnton, Cheshire  In answer to Question SS 11 I would like Option A – Retain the Green Belt I do not believe that our local area is set up to cope with such numbers of housing and it would dramatically impact local wildlife  There are other much more suitable brown belts where housing could be built 

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10539

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Annie Broadbent

I&O_11037
I am writing in response to the local plan July 25 document in relation to houses being built on green belt land by Barnton, Cheshire  To answer Question SS 11 I strongly urge Option A – Retain the Green Belt I do not believe that our local area is set up to cope with such numbers of housing and it would dramatically and devastatingly impact local wildlife  There are other much more suitable brown belts where housing could be built 

Comment

Representation ID: 10540

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Rebecca Duffy

I&O_11038
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate. I am answering *Question SS 11* and my choice is: *Option A – Retain the Green Belt*

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10541

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Catherine Smith

I&O_11039


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10542

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Matt Roscoe

I&O_11040
As a resident of Neston (CH64) I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate.  I feel there are sufficient brownfield sites in the local area and non-greenbelt land to accommodate any immediate housing requirements for the CH64 area. I am therefore answering *Question SS 11* and my choice is: *Option A – Retain the Green Belt*

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 10543

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Henry Richard Cawley

I&O_11041
I hereby am answering question SS11 and I choose option 3

Option C - Sustainable transport corridors

Comment

Representation ID: 10544

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Anita Gillen

I&O_11042
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large-scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate. I am answering *Question SS 11* and my choice is: *Option A – Retain the Green Belt*
Option A - take forward current Local Plan Objectives