Comment

Representation ID: 11915

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Holly Supple

I&O_12429
In response to Question SS 11 , I support the retention of the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11920

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Clare Evans

I&O_12434
In answer to *Question SS 11* my choice is: *Option A - Retain the Green Belt *  

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11921

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Julie and Keith Robbins

I&O_12435
We would like to formally raise an objection to any green belt land being redesignated or lost as part of this new local plan Therefore would only support Option A

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11927

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Dawn Cholmondeley

I&O_12441
I would like to make a brief statement in which I believe we need every possible area of Greenbelt land saved! Firstly my regular walk in Heath lane  crossing the Welsh road in childer Thornton, I witness horrendous flooding issues due to the hardcore that has been laid on the travellers field ! 1 this has never been an issue as bad in this area since the laying of the hardcore, if this continues the floods will continue to get worse for the poor people who live in the adjacent homes ! 2 Greenbelt space is good for our mental health and well being and many who walk, run , cycle feel invigorated afterwards. 3 wildlife and habitat needs conservation not destruction! 4 It is necessary for the air that we breath , Greenbelt space filters out pollution, and being right next to a heavily busy road it is even more important it has to be saved

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11953

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Caryl Evans

I&O_12467
I am responding to the consultation on the proposed development on Green Belt land around Neston and Parkgate. I am strongly opposed to the proposal. In answer to *Question SS 11* my choice is: *Option A - Retain the Green Belt *

Comment

Representation ID: 11954

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Michael Moore

I&O_12468
Answering question SS 11, my choice is ‘A’ - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11955

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Lynda Coles

NOR06 and NOR07
I&O_12469
To whom it may concern, Comments pertaining to: Northwich Local Plan  particularly - NOR06 - NOR07 Although I see the Option A : Retain the green belt, as the lesser disruptive option to the land and community I have several concerns about the viability of any of the options. Below are my specific points of concern.    1 'Residents of the proposed new houses will increase the use of our local infrastructure, such as schools, GP surgeries and highways.' The present population are already not served well. Adding more residents will overpower  the existing systems. Therefore the 'Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP)'  has to take into consideration the existing problems as well as the intended problem of adding more residents. This will entail a lot of extra investment. Where will this come from? 2 It has been pointed out at the meeting, ( 9.8.25)  by a parish councillor that the original plan stated that its intention was to : 'to preserve character of Davenham ; to improve and only build where there is a good infrastructure ; to use no prime agricultural land will be built on — unless (extreme) necessity.'  All of the present proposed options contravene  these statements.  Question 31-Are there any constraints, including Infrastructure provision, that should be considered for Northwich/DAVENHAM when developing the new Local Plan '- NOR06 - NOR07 Davenham is a historic village with a strong sense of identity and a designated Conservation Area. The proposed developments would dramatically alter the rural character of the village, and risk encroachment on heritage assets and open spaces valued by the community. The scale of development proposed is entirely disproportionate to the village’s size and setting Davenham’s existing infrastructure is already operating at or near capacity. The road network, particularly the A556, Hartford Road, and London Road, suffers from heavy congestion, and further development would exacerbate traffic, air quality, and safety concerns. Public transport provision is minimal, and additional residents would place unsustainable pressure on limited local bus services. The sites identified include areas at risk of flooding or on land that serves an important function in mitigating local flood risk. Any development here would increase surface water run-off and impact local watercourses. Furthermore, there would be a loss of biodiversity and greenfield land, contrary to sustainability objectives.' 3a We have already demolished ancient hedgerows and habits in Davenham by building a bypass and a motorway bridge into Church Street Davenham.  In doing so we have also lost an ancient site dating back thousands of years,  (Excavations at Church Moss, Davenham, Cheshire, 1995-96). 4 I am concerned by the incontinent use of planning applications by developers who have no interest in the existing community sensibilities. I am alarmed by the thoughtless practice of putting forward other peoples land for proposed building applications. This does not reflect a caring and considered approach — much less when Cheshire west and Chester Council accepts such proposals.  I commend my comments to you and hope that you consider them favourably.

Comment

Representation ID: 11956

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Barry Lambert

I&O_12470


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11957

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: E Luxford

I&O_12471
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed large scale development on Green Belt land in and around Neston and Parkgate.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11958

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Adam Loftus

I&O_12472


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11959

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Neil Williams

I&O_12473


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11960

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Kathryn Craven

SS 11
I&O_12474
I wish to make the following comment in regard to the above mentioned Local Plan Consultation (Regulation 18) and that this answer be taken into consideration as the most appropriate spatial strategy for Cheshire West and Chester. Answer to Question SS11: Option A: Retain the Green Belt. 

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11968

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Terry Sullivan

I&O_12482
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 SS11 and my choice is - OPTION A - Retain the Green belt

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11969

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: David Thomas Evans

I&O_12483
In answer to *Question SS 11* my choice is: *Option A - Retain the Green Belt *

Comment

Representation ID: 11971

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Janet Brown

I&O_12485
I am responding to question SS11 of the proposed planning application to incorporate green belt land when building new houses.   I strongly object to this and therefore select Option A of question SS11

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11984

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Christine Haslam

I&O_12498
QSS11: I vote for OPTION A : retaining the Green Belt around the Chester/village areas.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 11992

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Carol Lawrence

I&O_12506
There is already an enormous amount of traffic using this area [Great Boughton] and hundreds more houses will not help.  We also NEED green spaces for humans and wildlife!

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12010

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr and Mrs R Basford

Agent: Grimster Planning

I&O_12524
Please refer to comments in response to questions SS14, SS15 and SS17 below.

Comment

Representation ID: 12028

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Clare Fish

I&O_12542
-There are not ,in reality 3 options as many of the proposals sit within each option eg those for Winsford ,Cuddington  and Sandiway . - None of the ‘options’ respond fully to the 4 principles of the Vision eg ‘Protecting the special  character  of the Cheshire countryside and villages ‘ as the development proposals for example in both Cuddington / Sandiway ,Hartford and Winsford encroach on neighbouring hamlets and provide ‘mission creep ‘ across otherwise productive land. The  combined impact of proposals for Winsford ( WIN07) and( CUD03 ) proposals for Cuddington and Sandiway is a prime example of this .

Comment

Representation ID: 12029

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: David Gould

I&O_12543
oppose on the following grounds; 1) It appears that the development zones were drawn at random with no consideration for our precious green belt  

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12032

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Emma McPaul

SS 11
I&O_12546
I choose Option A – Retain the Green Belt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12035

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Jacinta Loftus

I&O_12549


Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12036

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Elaine Richardson

I&O_12550
Option A - retain the green belt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12039

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Peter Rawling

SS 11
I&O_12553
My option would be A.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12040

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mia Loftus

I&O_12554
option of A - Retain the Greenbelt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12042

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Barbara Frith

I&O_12556
Planning proposal for new homes Barnton  I have been looking at your proposed sites for housing development in Northwich and am really disappointed that you are considering development in the green belt around the town. Green belt is protected land to prevent urban sprawl, exactly what you’re proposing if you decide to build there. Not only that but the character of our outlying villages will be permanently damaged as will the countryside. Our green spaces should be protected! I am writing in direct response to question SS11 and would strongly opt for Option A to retain the green belt for everyone’s benefit.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12046

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Lauren Sloka

I&O_12560
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*

Comment

Representation ID: 12052

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Ellliot Loftus

I&O_12566
option of A - Retain the Greenbelt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12057

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Robert Tate

I&O_12571
I would like to choose - Option A - Retaining Greenbelt.

Option A - Retain the Green Belt

Comment

Representation ID: 12064

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Hannah Bridges

I&O_12578
option A retain the green belt

Option A - Retain the Green Belt