Comment

Representation ID: 8598

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Lee Murphy

SS29
I&O_9089
I have been unable to complete this via the online process which I found extremely difficult to navigate and was not easy.  Please find below my response the proposed Local Plan Consultation for Davenham. I would urge the Council to give greater consideration to the following areas:  - NOR10 - Weaverham, which has existing infrastructure and capacity to accommodate further planned growth and an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing with good access to the A49  - NOR08 - Land adjoining the A556 -opposite Hartford, where development would benefit from its better transport links A556 and access to main services NB Although Green belt the traffic from this proposed development would not add pressure on either Hartford or Davenham directly  -I also believe that the further regeneration of Northwich town centre, where brownfield land and underused commercial areas offer a prime opportunity for sustainable, mixed-use housing development should be considered, as there is already a huge amount of unused residences that have been left empty for several years now, together with further expansion of Winnington Village.  

Comment

Representation ID: 8601

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Craig Griffiths

NOR8 and NOR 10
I&O_9092
To ensure housing delivery is both sustainable and supported by infrastructure, I believe the Council should focus on locations with existing capacity and reduced environmental impact: NOR10 – Weaverham: Well connected to the A49 with infrastructure already in place, making it a logical and proportionate growth location. NOR08 – Land adjacent to the A556 (opposite Hartford): Despite its Green Belt designation, this site’s proximity to major road links means it could take development without exacerbating congestion in neighbouring villages. Northwich Town Centre Regeneration: Prioritising brownfield and underused sites in the town centre aligns with NPPF objectives to redevelop urban areas first, revitalising the local economy while preserving the countryside. Winnington Village Expansion: Extending this already established settlement would enable cohesive growth supported by existing community facilities.

Comment

Representation ID: 8642

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Ian Hamilton

NOR06 and NOR07
I&O_9133
To whom it may concern.  I object to the proposed local plan to develop the above areas. These developments would drastically alter a small historical village, the size of the proposed developments would have a negative effect on the valued open spaces and character of the village. Davenham's existing infrastructure is all ready at near capacity, the road network through the village is already highly congested and more traffic would only exacerbate the problems from an environmental and safety aspect. Local schools are also near capacity so pupils would have to be conveyed to schools outside the village causing more congestion and pollution. I would suggest that the following area's are more suitable for development, NOR10- Weaverham which has good access via the A49 and has the existing infrastructure and capacity to accommodate further development. The council should also consider development NOR01 to the northeast of Barnton with good access to the village and existing facilities and major transport links (A559 &A49) There are also a number of brownfield sites in and around Northwich more suitable for development rather than greenfield land. I would urge the Cheshire West and Chester Council for the reasons stated above to reconsider the proposed developments within the Davenham parish.

Comment

Representation ID: 8654

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Bellway Homes (North West) Ltd and Bloor Homes Ltd

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9145
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)

Comment

Representation ID: 8656

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Evans

NOR11
I&O_9147
My wife and I are residents at XXX, Northwich XXX and would like to comment on the CWAC local plan and more specifically the outlined development off Sandy Lane/ Station Road, Weaverham (within NOR11). With reference to the explanatory video on the CWAC site https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7G-qUDvECUw I note that 3 options are given for each area. I would like to suggest there is a 4 th option which I suggest at the bottom of this email , and which I have written to my MP on. Onto the Station Road/ Sandy Lane proposal itself. Our key concerns are: Logistics The 400kV Dee-Daines electricity transmission lines divide the plot approximately in half. We have been told that the developer would propose keeping this in place with a ‘green corridor’ underneath, together with a 30 metre separation to the nearest dwelling. Frankly, the thought of children playing (potentially with kites and drones) under this doesn’t bear thinking about. And whilst there is no statistical evidence to suggest ill-health from close proximity to high EMF, I can’t believe people would want to live in a home 30 metres from a major power line*. We live 170 meters away and the noise, particularly in damp weather, is very noticeable. (* This UK National Grid affiliated site suggests 150m from a 400kV line to get to background levels https://www.emfs.info/living-or-buying-near-an-overhead-line ) One other option would be to bury the cables, which would not remove the EMF of course. We can see from this 2024 House of Lords document https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/undergrounding-electrical-transmission-cables/ under section 3.1 , the implication of burying a 400kV power line would be 4 separate trenches in a work area 65 metres wide, and presumably for maintenance, no housing could be built over anyway. I appreciate this is an ‘optioneering’ phase and assume no geotechnical investigation has been done on the site. However, I believe the original planned route of the A49 Weaverham by-pass was over this land but was moved due to ground conditions. So, it’s probably called Sandy Lane for good reason. Local Infrastructure Access to the proposed development would be a major issue. Station Road is already heavily utilised as a main route from Northwich to Frodsham and Stanlow. Sandy Lane is winding so no good sight-lines, and the safer access from the A49 would have to join into it’s deep cutting to the west. One of the attractions for the location is I believe the rail links. The present station at Acton Bridge is small, low-level, with limited parking and few services running. It also does not provide an east-west route such as that at Greenbank as the current rail 'link curve’ close to Hodge Lane is not used by passenger services. Even if connected, taking the train to Manchester from Greenbank takes a minimum of an hour and 10 minutes for a journey of 20 miles! Local services are already severely stretched. Whilst I can’t comment on the school capacities. Securing a GP appointment or finding a dentist are very difficult, but other forgotten areas like sports and leisure facilities have not been expanded. I run a badminton club in Northwich and it is noticeable how far people are coming from to play from new developments. Environmental & Wellbeing The proposed site is green-belt, and farmed land. We are already losing both at an alarming rate, and green-belt should not be developed until other avenues have been exhausted. This area isn’t just a green-field, and an important area for biodiversity, it is a vital space for local families, many of whom walk from Weaverham to access nature and take in the view over the fields. Developers and builders want easy options, building on green open spaces avoids the expense of dealing with brown-field sites. I can understand too why farmers would be attracted to selling their land rather than small profits made from farming it. But we must resist self-interest and protect green space for future generations. Preservation of this space is vital to the wellbeing and identity of the community. If this land is built on, it is surely the ‘thin end of the wedge’ for the whole corridor between Acton Bridge and Weaverham being built on, and the loss of identity for both. The proposed site is on high-level with deep run-offs on all but the southern aspect. Modern developments are typically very concentrated, have small gardens and no lawned gardens to the front, with large areas of hard-landscaping. Surface water has to go somewhere, and having worked for United Utilities wastewater planning department for some years, I know this is an increasing problem when combined with ageing existing underground infrastructure.   Based on the above , we strongly object to the consideration of this site for development as outlined and other green areas around Northwich. Of the 3 options suggested, and if there are no other options considered, we would support option A : ‘Retain the Green Belt’.   A fourth option? Whilst I appreciate this is effectively an 'optioneering' phase, I believe if just a proportion of these proposals go ahead, it will decimate our villages- the fragile infrastructure of which are already stretched. Options B&C on the proposals will eat into areas of green-belt land too, and our own village would potentially double in size based on the maps. Rather than this 'death by a thousand cuts' approach to our towns and villages, I believe that if we need 29,000 new homes in CWAC, effectively a town.... then that is what we should look at building. A new 'NEW TOWN' for Cheshire West, complete with the infrastructure built-in and expanded as it grows- new roads, railway stations off existing lines, schools, surgeries, sports and leisure facilities, restaurants and pubs etc. I do believe this requires significant effort at National level, just as the government put in place in the decades following the second world war, in three waves up to the 1970's. Locally, Warrington (Birchwood) and Runcorn were the result of these efforts. Provision would need to be in place to restrict housing away from private landlords and AirBnBs, neither of which will help the housing situation for new buyers. We have seen with recent large local developments such as at Winnington, that what is promised by developers and builders, and what is delivered are two very different things. What passes for even a pub in Winnington is a converted shop unit. Developers also play the system well, submitting piece-meal planning applications which, when viewed individually, do not incur infrastructure improvements. Even with the promise of affordable housing, we saw on the development at the old Eden Vale factory off the A49, that the number of affordable houses can be reduced by a builder ‘not making enough profit’ Finally, I don’t understand why the north of the county continues to get ‘hit’ by these large developments while the rural south of the county (outside of green-belt) continues largely undeveloped. I would have thought that Northwich had ‘done it’s bit’ for now with Winnington and Kingsmead for example.

Comment

Representation ID: 8717

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Daniel Beckingham

NOR08 and NOR10
I&O_9210
In response to SS 29 Question 29 - Which of the potential growth ar around Northwich do you consider the most suitable? We respectfully urge the Council to give increased attention to the following key areas for future development: NOR10 – Weaverham : This location benefits from established infrastructure and sufficient capacity to support additional planned growth. It presents a valuable opportunity to deliver a diverse mix of housing with convenient access to the A49. NOR08 – Land adjacent to the A556, opposite Hartford : Development here would be well-served by superior transport links via the A556 and proximity to essential services. While the site lies within the Green Belt, it is important to note that traffic generated by this proposal would not place direct pressure on either Hartford or Davenham. Northwich Town Centre : We advocate for continued regeneration efforts in the town centre, where brownfield sites and underutilised commercial spaces offer significant potential for sustainable, mixed-use housing developments. Winnington Village : We also support further expansion of Winnington Village as part of a broader strategy to meet housing needs in a balanced and sustainable manner. Gadbrook Park : Given that the planned Amazon logistics warehouse on NOR05 is no longer happening, the land could be repurposed via a change of use for housing instead.

Comment

Representation ID: 8719

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Cathrine Ruston

NOR10, NOR08
I&O_9212
We urge the Council to give greater consideration to the following areas: - NOR10  - Weaverham, which has existing infrastructure and capacity to accommodate further planned growth and an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing with good access to the A49.  - NOR08  - Land adjoining the A556, opposite Hartford, where development would benefit from its better transport links A556 and access to main services. NB Although Green belt, the traffic from this proposed development would not add pressure on either Hartford or Davenham directly. I also believe that the further regeneration of Northwich town centre, where brownfield land and underused commercial areas offer a prime opportunity for sustainable, mixed-use housing development should be considered, together with further expansion of Winnington Village.

Comment

Representation ID: 8732

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Ivan Beckingham

NOR08 and NOR10
I&O_9225
In response to SS 29 Question 29 - Which of the potential growth ar around Northwich do you consider the most suitable? We respectfully urge the Council to give increased attention to the following key areas for future development: NOR10 – Weaverham : This location benefits from established infrastructure and sufficient capacity to support additional planned growth. It presents a valuable opportunity to deliver a diverse mix of housing with convenient access to the A49. NOR08 – Land adjacent to the A556, opposite Hartford : Development here would be well-served by superior transport links via the A556 and proximity to essential services. While the site lies within the Green Belt, it is important to note that traffic generated by this proposal would not place direct pressure on either Hartford or Davenham. Northwich Town Centre : We advocate for continued regeneration efforts in the town centre, where brownfield sites and underutilised commercial spaces offer significant potential for sustainable, mixed-use housing developments. Winnington Village : We also support further expansion of Winnington Village as part of a broader strategy to meet housing needs in a balanced and sustainable manner. Gadbrook Park : Given that the planned Amazon logistics warehouse on NOR05 is no longer happening, the land could be repurposed via a change of use for housing instead.

Comment

Representation ID: 8741

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Mark Cunnington

SS29
I&O_9234
I wish to object to the proposed housing development on Waverton land within the Cheshire West and Chester Local Plan. The Green Belt exists to prevent urban sprawl, safeguard the countryside, and preserve the distinct character of our communities. Building on it would undermine those purposes and cause irreversible damage. Protection for Future Generations Our countryside is a vital natural asset. Once developed, Green Belt land is permanently lost. It is our duty to protect these landscapes so that future generations inherit open spaces, clean air, and thriving ecosystems. Wildlife and Habitats The proposed development threatens habitats that support a wide range of species. Green Belt areas provide food, shelter, and safe corridors for wildlife. At a time when biodiversity is in serious decline nationally, every effort must be made to protect, not diminish, such habitats. Pollution and Environmental Harm Housing development on this site would introduce multiple forms of pollution: Air pollution from additional traffic and congestion. Water pollution from run-off into rivers and groundwater. Noise and light pollution, which damage wellbeing and disrupt natural ecosystems. The cumulative effect of these impacts would erode the quality of life for both residents and wildlife. Sustainable Alternatives Government planning policy emphasises using brownfield sites and under-utilised urban land first. Cheshire West and Chester has opportunities to prioritise redevelopment of such areas rather than sacrificing Green Belt. This approach delivers new homes while revitalising communities and protecting the environment. Conclusion The proposal conflicts with the fundamental purposes of Green Belt designation and with principles of sustainable development. I therefore urge Cheshire West and Chester Council to reject it, and instead focus on housing solutions that safeguard our countryside, protect habitats, and secure a healthy environment for future generations.

Comment

Representation ID: 8829

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9322
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)

Comment

Representation ID: 8833

Received: 26/08/2025

Respondent: Beverley Crerar

NOR05 and NOR08
I&O_9326
-NOR05 - Land near Gadbrook Park It is my opinion that this land should be subject to a change of use and would be better used for residential development. It would have excellent access to the A556 - Chester - Manchester, Crewe, M6J19/J18 etc. and would mirror a similar housing development almost opposite. Gadbrook Park, since Barclays Bank left their two large sites there, it has freed up more than adequate office space for any new start up businesses, or businesses looking to relocate to the area This scheme would also give CWAC and Network Rail the opportunity to build a much needed railway station in Rudheath which could be used for passenger and potentially freight purpose. - NOR08 - Land adjoining the A556 - opposite Hartford, where development would benefit from its better transport links A556 and proximity to Hartford Railway station and Northwich town centre Although Green belt the traffic from this proposed development would not add pressure on Davenham directly, although in busy times it's a given that Hartford Road would be used as a rat run.

Comment

Representation ID: 8929

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Caroline Bradbury

I&O_9422
As an ever increasing town in houses and not business , further consideration should be taken for all the vacant buildings on sites around the town.  There are numerous empty buildings which could be converted into houses/flats or other business development in and around the town centre.  Also on sites that are already assigned as brown field sites such as the Gadbrook Park, the old ICI works at various sites around the town  Also areas that are already under development, not breaking out on clean agricultural land.  Eg NOR04, NORO3, NOR10

Comment

Representation ID: 8963

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Mrs J Jenkins

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9456
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)

Comment

Representation ID: 8996

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Patricia Sant

I&O_9489
I would urge the Council to give greater consideration to the following areas: - NOR10 - Weaverham, which has existing infrastructure and capacity to accommodate further planned growth and an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing with good access to the A49 - NOR08 - Land adjoining the A556 -opposite Hartford, where development would benefit from its better transport links A556 and access to main services NB Although Green belt the traffic from this proposed development would not add pressure on either Hartford or Davenham directly -I also believe, that the further regeneration of Northwich town centre, where brownfield land and underused commercial areas offer a prime opportunity for sustainable, mixed-use housing development should be considered, together with further expansion of Winnington Village

Comment

Representation ID: 9226

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Helen Renshaw

I&O_9719
It would seem more sensible to develop and redevelop the centre of Northwich with mixed use zoning including affordable and social housing/accommodation. A number of the existing town centre buildings have large footprints resulting in inefficient use of the space. Development here would benefit local businesses and utilise the existing transport infrastructure. There is a patch of vacant land in Winnington Village between Whitby Drive and Western Way, however the single lane Barnton Bridge has always been inadequate and this should be a priority to address.

Comment

Representation ID: 9235

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Martin Renshaw

I&O_9728
It would seem more sensible to develop and redevelop the centre of Northwich with mixed use zoning including affordable and social housing/accommodation. A number of the existing town centre buildings have large footprints resulting in inefficient use of the space. Development here would benefit local businesses and utilise the existing transport infrastructure. There is a patch of vacant land in Winnington Village between Whitby Drive and Western Way, however the single lane Barnton Bridge has always been inadequate and this should be a priority to address.

Comment

Representation ID: 9238

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: AM Littler, NJM Littler and C Leigh

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9731
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)

Comment

Representation ID: 9353

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Ashall Land

Agent: Marrons

I&O_9847
Map 5.6 illustrates Northwich growth options (p.45(). Only two residential sites are located in Davenham – NOR07 and NOR06 – and are included in all three of the Council’s proposed spatial strategy options (A, B, and C). Appendix B provides additional information on these identified two areas. Davenham East (NOR6) is estimated for 862 homes, and Davenham West (NOR07) for 443 homes. Neither of these two options for Davenham can be considers as ‘most suitable’ since these are large land areas that have a limited relationship to the existing settlement or local facilities. The consultation document claims to have identified around 100 potential growth areas to meet housing and employment needs, mainly focuses on edges of towns, larger villages and near rail stations. The sites are said to have been selected based on existing permissions, past submissions and a review of undeveloped allocations. However, this is misleading as the identified potential growth areas do not accurately reflect all suitable opportunities in Northwich. The LAA Stage One update report indicates at least 33 other sites that have been considered ‘suitable’ for potential residential development within the parish of Davenham alone, 22 of which are adjacent settlements to the existing Northwich urban area (within 100m). None of these sites are reflected in the ‘growth options’ for Northwich, and this is deceptive. The Council needs to ensure growth and site allocations are not limited to these very broad and disproportionately large allocations. A full, rigorous site selection process must be undertaken to equally evaluate all opportunities for housing delivery in Northwich.

Comment

Representation ID: 9369

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Malcom Whitwood

SS29
I&O_9863
Question 29 - Which of the potential growth areas around Northwich do you consider the most suitable? We urge the Council to give consideration to the following areas:   NOR10 - Weaverham, which has existing infrastructure and capacity to accommodate further planned growth and an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing with good access to the A49. NOR08 - Land adjoining the A556 - opposite Hartford. This development would benefit from transport linking directly onto the A556, and access to main services. Northwich town centre, has a number of empty premises and is in need of redevelopment. Brownfield land and underused commercial areas offer a prime opportunity for sustainable, mixed-use housing development should be considered Further expansion of Winnington Village and the land off Warrington Road and Manchester Road in Lostock Gralam.

Comment

Representation ID: 9389

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs B S Logie

I&O_9884
I feel there are real constraints in infrastructure to options B and C around the Northwich area. The glaringly obvious one is the Victorian swing bridge, which is now taking increased amounts of traffic as a result of the new urban village. It will additionally be  burdened by lorry movements , associated with  the solar farm on the outskirts of Weaverham, for five years plus, which has now won its appeal. I also believe that the remaining Tata works has also been earmarked for another very substantial development. The bridge remains the fly in the ointment, under options B and C. This problem will not go away , and will be compounded, with no one , at the moment coming up with a concrete plan to solve it. This will need substantial funds and solid commitment , from ALL parties, to get this massive infrastructure project, in its own right, built. At one recent public meeting it was the hot topic, with the individual hosting ,citing the chicken and egg scenario. We need to establish the extra development to get the bridge built!  Actually we need to get the bridge built to allow the extra development. The bridge is already extremely vulnerable and any serious breach would mean complete chaos, if all the above depended on it.  A new road around the river into town from the second urban village may help. This would give an alternative route into Northwich from the Winnington area . The current route down Winnington Hill and the one way system is dreadfully congested. We are finding in Comberbach and Anderton , that increasing numbers of vehicles are coming over the swing bridge from the Urban Village,  through to Comberbach , to access the A559 in order to get into town , as it is quicker than queuing down Winnington Hill and through the one way system.    Secondly As a resident of Comberbach for many years I have seen the village, and others around us, becoming increasingly degraded by traffic. The urban village has had a great impact . Options B and C would compound this. These semi rural communities are served by poor, C graded roads or just lanes. They are narrow and dangerous, and as they are,  unable to cope with  any further increases in demand placed upon them. The main C road through Comberbach, has such narrow pavements in parts, you cannot walk two abreast. There are two nasty narrow bends, one in the village, where houses are placed right on it, and another at the Hollows in Anderton. These are serious constraints to extra vehicle movements, which would be degrading to a small community environment and put residents at risk. Ironically a new swing bridge could make this problem worse. Placing a road through Marbury would be an extra cost again, would be unacceptable to those who use the park and I believe wouldn't bring that much relief in the long term.    Thirdly options B and C, which look to utilise more of the green belt and rely on present transport links, runs the risk of merging communities who have their own  social and environmental  identities. They have been settled communities for many years, and even though they have absorbed new developments within their own boundaries , remain distinct. NORO1 from what I can see, would merge Barnton and Anderton to a much greater extent. Surely the amount of brownfield development that we have already had on our side of Northwich, as well as the second Tata site in the future, should be sufficient to enable these communities to retain their identities.

Comment

Representation ID: 9413

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Deborah Mercer

SS29
I&O_9908
Consideration should be given to those areas where transport and infrastructure issues can be minimised and where conservation and heritage will not be directly affected. Hartford NOR8, Northwich centre and Winsford have direct rail services which should be prioritised over road traffic to reduce congestion and increased environmental impact. Weaverham - NOR10 has existing infrastructure and good access to both the A49 and rail stations in Hartford.  Northwich town centre in particular has brownfield land and legacy commercial areas which offer a prime opportunity for regeneration and sustainable, affordable housing which would suit first-time buyers, drive increased employment and help re-invigorate a town centre which is suffering from decreased footfall and shop closures from the major chains. Any initiatives which can arrest this decline and put Northwich on a path to be a vibrant town centre again should be considered as a priority.

Comment

Representation ID: 9432

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: David Woodmansey

I&O_9927
We strongly urge the Council to give greater consideration to the following areas: - NOR01  -  Barnton  - Although currently identified as a green belt site the expansion to the North east of Barnton should be considered, due to its proximity to major transport links A559, M56, and access to existing village facilities, Doctors Dentists shops and schools. It would have minimal impacts on the surrounding landscape. It would also provide an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing as per the Local Plan requirements -NOR05 - Land near Gadbrook Park  We attended an open briefing by the landowners who discussed using this site for a large logistics warehouse. It is our opinion that this land should be subject to a change of use and would be better used for residential development. It would have excellent access to the A556 - Chester - Manchester, Crewe, M6J19/J18 etc. and would mirror a similar housing development almost opposite. Gadbrook Park, since Barclays Bank left their two large sites there, it has freed up more than adequate office space for any new start up businesses, or businesses looking to relocate to the area This scheme would also give CWAC and Network Rail the opportunity to build a much needed railway station in Rudheath which could be used for passenger and potentially freight purpose - NOR08  -  Land adjoining the A556  - opposite Hartford, where development would benefit from its better transport links A556 and proximity to Hartford Railway station and Northwich town centre Although Green belt the traffic from this proposed development would not add pressure on Davenham directly,  although in busy times it's a given that Hartford Road would be used as a rat run - NOR10  -  Weaverham , which has existing infrastructure, good road network with easy access to the A49 shops, doctors, dentists and schools and capacity to accommodate further planned growth. In our opinion the site would create an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing as per the local plan requirements. We also believe any developer as part of any planning permission granted a condition should be to potentially fund a new access road into (out of) Northwich to alleviate the pressure on the Winnington Lane bridge to /from Anderton, Barnton

Comment

Representation ID: 9434

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees & Beneficiaries of Ms D Bentley dec'd

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9929
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)

Comment

Representation ID: 9445

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Holly Hodkinson

I&O_9940
We strongly urge the Council to give greater consideration to the following areas: - NOR01 - Barnton - Although currently identified as a green belt site the expansion to the North east of Barnton should be considered, due to its proximity to major transport links A559, M56, and access to existing village facilities, Doctors Dentists shops and schools. It would have minimal impacts on the surrounding landscape. It would also provide an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing as per the Local Plan requirements -NOR05 - Land near Gadbrook Park We attended an open briefing by the landowners who discussed using this site for a large logistics warehouse. It is our opinion that this land should be subject to a change of use and would be better used for residential development. It would have excellent access to the A556 - Chester - Manchester, Crewe, M6J19/J18 etc. and would mirror a similar housing development almost opposite. Gadbrook Park, since Barclays Bank left their two large sites there, it has freed up more than adequate office space for any new start up businesses, or businesses looking to relocate to the area This scheme would also give CWAC and Network Rail the opportunity to build a much needed railway station in Rudheath which could be used for passenger and potentially freight purpose - NOR08 - Land adjoining the A556 - opposite Hartford, where development would benefit from its better transport links A556 and proximity to Hartford Railway station and Northwich town centre Although Green belt the traffic from this proposed development would not add pressure on Davenham directly, although in busy times it's a given that Hartford Road would be used as a rat run - NOR10 - Weaverham , which has existing infrastructure, good road network with easy access to the A49 shops, doctors, dentists and schools and capacity to accommodate further planned growth. In our opinion the site would create an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing as per the local plan requirements. We also believe any developer as part of any planning permission granted a condition should be to potentially fund a new access road into (out of) Northwich to alleviate the pressure on the Winnington Lane bridge to /from Anderton, Barnton .

Comment

Representation ID: 9473

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Anna & David Last

SS29
I&O_9968
Question SS29: Northwich Growth Areas NOR 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 08, 09, 10, 11 and 12

Comment

Representation ID: 9585

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: C, M and R Allsop

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_10080
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)

Comment

Representation ID: 9699

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Vistry Group and J Whittingham

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_10195
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)

Comment

Representation ID: 9819

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: SA, and SJ Arden, J C Coombs and J Hand

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_10316
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)

Comment

Representation ID: 9895

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Greg Osborn

NOR08, NOR10
I&O_10392
I urge the Council to give greater consideration to the following areas: NOR10  - Weaverham, which has existing infrastructure and capacity to accommodate further planned growth and an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing with good access to the A49. NOR08  - Land adjoining the A556 opposite Hartford, where development would benefit from its better transport links A556 and access to main services NB Although Green belt the traffic from this proposed development would not add pressure on either Hartford or Davenham directly.  I also believe that the further regeneration of Northwich town centre, where brownfield land and underused commercial areas offer a prime opportunity for sustainable, mixed-use housing development should be considered together with further expansion of Winnington Village.

Comment

Representation ID: 9967

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Colin Day

NOR01, NOR05, NOR08, NOR10
I&O_10464
Question 29 - Which of the potential growth areas around Northwich do you consider the most suitable?  I strongly urge the council to consider the following areas as they have the existing transport links and infrastructure to best support housing development. - NOR01 - Barnton - Although currently identified as a green belt site the expansion to the North east of Barnton should be considered, due to its proximity to major transport links A559, M56, and access to existing village facilities, Doctors Dentists shops and schools. It would have minimal impacts on the surrounding landscape. It would also provide an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing as per the Local Plan requirements  - NOR05 - Land near Gadbrook Park    It is understood that the landowners discussed using this site for a large logistics warehouse. This land could be subject to a change of use and would be better used for residential development. It would have excellent access to the A556 - Chester - Manchester, Crewe, M6J19/J18 etc. and would mirror a similar housing development almost opposite. Gadbrook Park, since Barclays Bank left their two large sites there, it has freed up more than adequate office space for any new start up businesses, or businesses looking to relocate to the area This scheme would also give CWAC and Network Rail the opportunity to build a much needed railway station in Rudheath which could be used for passenger and potentially freight purpose  - NOR08 - Land adjoining the A556 - opposite Hartford, where development would benefit from its better transport links A556 and proximity to Hartford Railway station and Northwich town centre Although Green belt the traffic from this proposed development would not add pressure on Davenham directly, although in busy times it's a given that Hartford Road would be used as a rat run - NOR10 - Weaverham , which has existing infrastructure, good road network with easy access to the A49 shops, doctors, dentists and schools and capacity to accommodate further planned growth. In our opinion the site would create an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing as per the local plan requirements. We also believe any developer as part of any planning permission granted a condition should be to potentially fund a new access road into (out of) Northwich to alleviate the pressure on the Winnington Lane bridge to /from Anderton, Barnton