Comment

Representation ID: 11557

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Sinead Nolan

I&O_12055
Dear Sir/Madam, 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* Yours faithfully,

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11592

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Landowners (Norley)

Agent: Woodford Land and Planning Limited

I&O_12090
The site at Norley is not identified as part of any of the potential growth locations. Within the growth options it is recognised that, ““a key difference between the Local Plan (Part One) and the new Local Plan is that there is a much more limited supply of previously developed land to accommodate new development, and unlike the last plan, larger areas of Green Belt and/or countryside are likely to be needed”. The landowner welcomes this recognition and considers that as a first priority, CWaC should prioritise making the most effective use of land by allocating infill sites and allowing rural settlements such as Norley to accommodate some of the housing need. Part of the land is currently underutilised and forms a natural extension to the existing settlement boundary so it is a logical area for growth. The preferred option therefore is none of the above and is a combination of Option B with distribution of housing growth across local service centres and settlements such as Norley. This will require not only a relaxation of rural settlement boundaries but a positive approach to allocating sites such as this in Norley. Given the sheer amount of growth required, all areas need to make a contribution not just large urban areas and urban extensions.

None of these

Comment

Representation ID: 11706

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Beck Homes Limited

Agent: NJL Consulting

I&O_12204
We do not consider that any single option, as presented in the document, as the most appropriate spatial option and an alternative spatial option is detailed below.

None of these

Comment

Representation ID: 11782

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Tracy Byron

I&O_12280
Dear Sir/Madam,   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* Yours faithfully,

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11783

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Louise Graves

I&O_12281
Dear Sir/Madam, 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: 11785

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Nadia Donaghy

I&O_12283
Dear Sir/Madam, 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 how the infrastructure around Neston / Parkgate could manage to cope with a large number of new properties  Yours faithfully,

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11795

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Blything

Agent: Wharfe Rural Planning Ltd

I&O_12293
For Kelsall, the consultation identifies land south and west of the village (KEL01) as a potential housing location. Our client’s land lies within area KEL01. We support all options for growth being promoted by the Council as it reduces the need to release green belt land, encourages development within and around key settlements and along transport corridors and reduces pressure on larger towns. The land is sustainabuly located and is available, deliverable, and aligns with national policy and the Council’s spatial strategy.

Comment

Representation ID: 11797

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: David Sutton

I&O_12295
My choice is Option A retain the Green Belt. I believe it’s important to protect the character of Cheshire, its countryside and villages from over development.  If you’re not careful there will be urban sprawl from Chester to Northwich and beyond. This will also happen if there is development along each railway station along the mid cheshire line.  It’s an idea but it should be killed now. Having homes built where there is no infrastructure and good roads will only incite additional costs in the long run.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11798

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Peter A Jerram

I&O_12296
Option A - Retain the Green Belt For the sake of the planet and future generations, we must not let another square inch of Green Belt be built on. We should, instead, be turning non-Green Belt land back into Green Belt. Our grandchildren will hate this generation if we fail to do this.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11799

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Beth Moray

I&O_12297
My response to Question SS 11 is that I support the retention of the Green Belt. Specifically this is in relation to the parcel of land by Lache Lane. Having had the building work of the Kings Moat for the last 3 years - every day - I do NOT want another round of building work to be granted for at least another 15 years. Every day the beep beep beep of reversing lorries.  My view ruined by some strange planning decisions such as building a football pitch at the same level as my upstairs windows directly next door.  Please, no more building work until I can sell up and move away from the area ruined.

Comment

Representation ID: 11800

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Andrea Brereton

I&O_12298
my choice is option A Retain the Green Belt

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11802

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Boydell

I&O_12300
I have failed to get through the whole document, but I just want to say that I oppose any housing in the green belt. I think this is Option A - retain the green belt!

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11804

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Helena Conlon

I&O_12302
I would like to vote for Option C - sustainable transport corridors in relation to the strategy options available.

Option C - Sustainable transport corridors

Comment

Representation ID: 11806

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Bruce Hill

I&O_12304
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: 11807

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Sandra & Philip Brown

I&O_12305
After attending a meeting on this subject last evening chaired by Councillor Gillian Edwards, we would wish to place our vote for Option A, retaining the green belt as it is now with minimal development. My wife and I worked all our lives to escape from suburbia and would like to enjoy our last years in a rural location such as Cuddington. Please don't take this away from us.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11810

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Meilir Jones

I&O_12308
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: 11811

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Jacqueline Halewood

I&O_12309
I strongly support the retention of the Green Belt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11812

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: John Firth

I&O_12310
I have attended a local meeting to view, understand and discuss the proposed options concerning the possible future development and expansion of Cuddington.  I prefer Option A which retains the present boundaries of the green belt.  The 'Green Belt' is worth keeping intact both as an area and as an ideal - any small erosion sets a precedent and makes further incursions more likely.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11813

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mike Chadwick

I&O_12311
option A (retain the green belt)

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11814

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Oliver Brown

I&O_12312
Option A – Retain the Green Belt

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11818

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Sophie Connolly

SS 11
I&O_12316
My choice is option A- to retain the green belt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11819

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Jason Moorcroft

I&O_12317
In response to question SS11 my option is A retain the green belt

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11820

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Becky Seymour

NOR10, NOR11, NOR12
I&O_12318


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11821

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Janice Kaye

SS 11
I&O_12319
Option A - Retain the greenbelt There has been more than enough building around the Northwich area in recent years. The countryside around the town and local villages should stay in the greenbelt for the population already living here to enjoy the surrounding countryside.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11823

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Susannah Summers-Cooke

I&O_12321


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11829

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Nicola Holroyd

SS 11
I&O_12328
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: 11830

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Stephen Potts

I&O_12329


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11831

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Belinda Birkett

I&O_12330
Especially for Green Lane and Flat Lane in Kelsall should also be Green Belt and from  unlock that area of Green Belt for future expansion of Kelsall 

Option B - Follow current Local Plan level and distribution of development

Comment

Representation ID: 11832

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Nicola Loftus

SS 11
I&O_12331
I am writing with regard to Question SS11 and would like to register my choice option of A - Retain the Greenbelt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11833

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: John Littler

I&O_12332


Option A - Retain the Green Belt