Comment

Representation ID: 1674

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Roxane Gorel

I&O_1784
NOR01 - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 1678

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Brian Parker

I&O_1788
NOR01 - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 1681

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Brian & Roxane Parker

I&O_1791
NOR01  - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 1684

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Michael & Rowena Fildes

I&O_1794
Why not look at brownfield sites round Northwich. Maybe relocating Manchester Road retail park to unused shops in Northwich and utilising that space.

Comment

Representation ID: 1687

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Nadine Baker

I&O_1797
NOR01  - Although currently identified as a green belt site, the expansion to the Northeast of Barnton should be considered, due to its proximity to major transport links (A559), and access to existing village facilities. It would have minimal impact on the surrounding landscape. It would also provide an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing, as per the Local Plan requirements

Comment

Representation ID: 1690

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Dylan Parker

I&O_1800
NOR01  - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 1693

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Hollie Parker

I&O_1803
NOR01  - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 1700

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Kathleen Watts

I&O_1810
I live in hartford in northwich. This was a small village with local shops and excellent education, popular with all age groups, but one of the more pricey areas in the immediate area. This has, over the last 10-20 years expanded significantly, causing traffic, education and services issues, with little mitigation from the large building firm that appears to now dominate the village. The village has basic amenities from a shopping perspective, with one small affordable co-op surrounded by high end, expensive, shops and small eateries. It benefits from 2 decent pubs, which both serve decent food at a price and an expensive drinkers pub which has very limited opening time. There is no local doctor, and NHS dental places are very difficult to find (impossible very recently). So, the large area of green belt behind Chester road which stretches out towards weaverham is on all 3 of your plans. I suspect (although of course this would be dependent upon the planning permission, I realise) that a blend of expensive 4/5 bed houses and affordable housing would be likely to be placed on this area with a new access onto Chester road enabled by the demolition of established houses and/or business(es). I also suspect in excess of 500 houses would be built there. My questions are: How would traffic be managed? In school term time (especially when the grange is in) between 8-9.30 and from 2.45 - 4.30 and then rush "hour" around half 5, the roads are gridlocked. I see this every day as I live past the station and it is impossible for anyone to travel the road between the top of chester road and greenbank in less than 20 minutes. I understand this is the same down school lane too. As redrow carefully did their road survey during school holidays for previous developments, this situation is already past breaking point and will be worsened by any additional traffic.  Where will the children go to school? The local primary schools are all fully subscribed and whilst there are a handful of places at the local high school, these will be taken by the high oversubscription of leftwich high school. Leftwich has had an upsurge of applications as kingsmead residents turn there instead of hartford due to the problems of getting their children to hartford. Added to this, we now have a housing estate where the only 16+ college was, meaning that those children leaving school at 16 who wish to take a less academic route, have to travel to crewe or Warrington and, to a lesser extent winsford, to complete their education. This access is made worse bit just by distance but also by the poor transport options and reliability for those children. Will transport actually improve? Try getting a train to and from hartford/greenbank. On paper it looks great, in reality we have multiple cancellations on a very sparse service. The buses are a little better than they were, but at work time just simply end up in the congestion and are rarely on time and run sparcely. Work : With extra houses come extra people of all ages and all abilities. This immediate area does not have a surplus of jobs - most people have to travel for work to Manchester, Chester, Warrington, Liverpool etc and there are a handful of shop and bar jobs in the small number of places in the village. With a blend of houses, some of those people will be dependent on local work which simply isn't here and getting to work without own transport is very challenging. Facilities : hartford is blessed with a cricket club, football club, tennis club, padel now, a golf club and a small children's park. Out of these, it's only the small children's park which is free. The other facilities are expensive and out of reach for most, leaving very little for those who can't afford them to do. Scouts, for example, is over subscribed with a long waiting list - you need to put your child's name down at birth it seems to get a place. And there are no public toilets in the village (but for some reason we have a table tennis table right by a car park....) Parking is a problem now for the shops - this needs to be increased now, never mind with more houses. Access points to this "new estate" need to be considered seriously. Not inly from a congestion perspective, but from a safety perspective. Creating multiple exits will cause a rat run effect. There are surrounding small roads with existing houses and many without pavements - they weren't built for traffic especially not works traffic. The physical problems of potholes and the inability of repairers to repair them, the flooding that has occurred on hartford roads since the introduction of new housing over the past few years and the development of the soak away areas are real problems now and will only worsen with additional building. In conclusion, without answers to these questions and solutions put in place in advance, no further large development should be considered. I feel let down by CWAC for not only not challenging the numbers put in place for the overall area, but for taking the easy option of picking on a lump of greenbelt in a place which doesn't solve a housing problem for the people that need it most. Put the houses where the jobs and facilities are!

Comment

Representation ID: 1702

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Ben Baines

I&O_1812
NOR01  - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 1705

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Adam Davies

I&O_1815
NOR01  - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 1708

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Laura Greaves

I&O_1818
NOR01 - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 1711

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Deborah Latham

I&O_1821
NOR01  - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 1713

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Roger Perris

I&O_1823
I am submitting my objections to the proposed local plan around Davenham village.. Areas nor06 and nor 07. This development will destroy the character of the village. it will add to congestion within the village it will result in more pollution from increased traffic. Essential agricultural farming land will be used, land that we can't afford to lose.

Support

Representation ID: 1761

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Sally Merrill

NOR06
I&O_1871
Here are my objections to the proposed development of NOR06 in the CWAC Local Plan Issues & Options (Regulation 18);
1. This would reduce the size of my holding by just under half and so would reduce my ability to make a living farming the farm.
2. No one has consulted me directly - surely this is the first thing to do. You would have been told to forget it!
3. The farm is my home , my life, my livelihood and I have looked after it and will continue to do so.
4. I believe in protecting the environment and encouraging wildlife on the farm in the form of bigger thicker hedges. maintaining the woodlands and planting 6000 trees to mitigate climate change and provide habitats.
5. I practise and have always practised regenerative farming.
6. 5 acres of this land is permanent pasture and has not been ploughed for over 60 years and so is a big carbon sink.
7. There is a high pressure sewage pipeline which crosses NOR06. The sewage system is at breaking point as sewage regularly overflows into our ditch and into the river Dane. Do we want to turn it into a permanent open sewer?
8. Houses on NOR06 would mean more water flowing down the ditches to the River Dane so exasperating the risk of flooding both on agricultural land and Northwich town centre.

Comment

Representation ID: 1794

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Michael Byrne

I&O_1904
There are plenty of options both here and at other locations, so how could you possibly justify building on green belt land?

Comment

Representation ID: 1885

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Stephen Hornsby

SS 30
I&O_1997
Question 30 - Do you have any future comments about any of the growth areas identified around Northwich?   Consideration should be given to NOR01 which although is currently green belt, expansion to the north east of Barnton should be considered again to it's proximity to major transport links and existing facilities.  

Comment

Representation ID: 1911

Received: 11/08/2025

Respondent: Kim Stone

NOR10, NOR11, NOR12
I&O_2023
Dear Sir/Madam Re: Local Plan regulation 18   I am writing to share my objections with regard to the proposed local plan citing N10, N11 and N12. I own a property on Sandy Lane and will be forced to sell due to the noise, disruption to sleep and anxiety this will cause my tenants and will leave 5 adults and 4 children homeless. The area is currently lush farm land and therefore the whole character of the village will be altered as new builds are not in keeping with the area and an influx of people not used to a hamlet style village where Weaver ham gets its name from will potentially have nothing to do and that often leads to vandalism.  The land homes many of our native species of wildlife such as badgers and foxes which would be unable to establish themselves if there is only a small area of greenery installed in the estate you are proposing to allow Barrett to build among the pylons. You may increase employment during construction but there is no other employment in the area due to shop closures in Northwich, and closure of local police station, tax office and Magistrates court, there have already been other developments in the Weaverham area such as Winnington that have caused traffic chaos and damage to the heritage site of the bridge to Barnton. We have an irregular bus service to Northwich so for youngsters seeking entertainment such as Brio, Barons Quay or going as far as Cheshire Oaks  and Warrington with cinemas there will be an increased demand for services causing more pollution. The number of children that will require educating will potentially then require extensions to schools which will lose more green spaces which will not help our ecosystems which in turn help human well being and survival.  Obviously we do not have enough services such as doctors or dentists to cope with the larger populous. I therefore hope that the council consider option A as the only plan to move forward with or to use original brownfield sites not alter gradings to suit a developers purpose. Yours faithfully K STONE 

Comment

Representation ID: 1950

Received: 14/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Jon Parry

I&O_2062
Again, infrastructure in terms of the network and amenities. There is a lack of places at scools, doctors, dentists and every other basic service.  The physical infrastucture to serve those over subscribed services is at or beyond breaking point and also in a poor state of repair or plain unfit for purpose  The A49 is already gridlocked for large parts of the day due to additional houses in Cuddington and surrounding areas  Minor roadworks recently have clearly demenstrated the catastrophic impact of additional traffic It is only going to get worse with Hynet as well   Any further development in Weaverham, Barnton or locale will necessitate huge investment in the A49 as well as additional (toll free) river crossing(s) at Winnington / Barnton 

Comment

Representation ID: 2003

Received: 12/08/2025

Respondent: Wendy Graham

SS 30
I&O_2119
Do you have any further comments about any of the growth areas identified - NOR01 - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 2018

Received: 12/08/2025

Respondent: Julia Tidmarsh

SS 30
I&O_2137
Question 30. - Do you have any further comments about any of the growth areas identified around Northwich NOR01 - North East of Barnton Although currently identified as a green belt site, expansion to this area should be open to consideration, due to its proximity to major transport links (A559), and access to existing village facilities. Further development in this area would, I believe, have minimal impact on the surrounding landscape and would provide an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing as per the Local Plan requirements.

Comment

Representation ID: 2020

Received: 12/08/2025

Respondent: Ben Birchenall

SS 30
I&O_2139
I am writing as a resident of Davenham who shares the same concerns voiced by many of my neighbours regarding the proposed development of 5,000 new homes across Northwich and Winsford. From the information made available, it is clear that our village will bear a disproportionate share of the impact—both in scale and in permanence.   Davenham is far more than a geographic location. It is a centuries-old community with deep roots, and valued for its distinctive character and semi-rural charm. This identity is not only important to those who live here but is part of Cheshire’s wider heritage. Allowing large-scale urban expansion to overwhelm it would mean losing something that cannot be replaced.   Preliminary details suggest the size of the village could double. Such growth is neither practical nor sustainable given our current infrastructure. Roads, particularly through the centre of the village and the village’s narrow lanes already face heavy use. Traffic frequently backs up due to over use and inability to enter the petrol station at peak times. This traffic also poses immense safety concerns, particularly to pedestrians and cyclists. The idea of significantly increasing vehicle numbers without major infrastructure improvements raises serious concerns for public safety.   Public spaces are few and greatly valued, and the surrounding green belt provides vital wildlife habitats, scenic beauty, and a necessary separation from urban sprawl—benefits we rely on for wellbeing as well as environmental    But beyond infrastructure, there is the question of what makes Davenham “Davenham.” It is a place where neighbours know one another, where the sense of belonging runs deep. Rapid expansion on this scale risks weakening that community spirit until it is gone altogether. This is more than development—it is the erosion of identity.    I acknowledge the national goal of increasing housing supply and the challenges Cheshire West faces in meeting its targets. However, growth should be approached with sensitivity, ensuring that it complements rather than overwhelms existing communities. Our Neighbourhood Plan was intended to give residents a meaningful voice, yet it now seems powerless in the face of broader policy demands.   I urge you to reconsider the effect this plan will have on Davenham and to explore solutions that protect the village’s character, safeguard its residents, and preserve the surrounding environment.   Yours faithfully, Ben Birchenall Resident of Davenham  

Comment

Representation ID: 2031

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Diane Johnson

NOR01
I&O_2150
NOR01 - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 2044

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Ronald Parker

I&O_2163
the planning proposal you are considering for such a large development is totally impractical for a place the size of Davenham and I will list my concerns as follows. Its access to the main area of Davenham is highly restricted. Yes there is one major route the A556 but once entering the local area things become highly restricted. Entering Davenham by Davenham Road off the A530 is at best not an easy drive but once you are within 1.5 miles the road becomes very dangerous for vehicles but for people walking or riding bicycles it’s highly dangerous.  Entering from Middlewhich on the A533 or London Road leads once again into a very small centre with restricted access through on street parking as there is no parking area with a considerable number of people crossing the road with restricted vision There are few shops and only one small store at the rear of the garage and once again little parking capability Limited availability for the majority of requirements for medical needs including Dentists Doctors and even Post Offices and Bank facilities. The proposed area carries much flora and forna that supports a whole range of wildlife from foxes rabbits owls and hawks and I’m sure many other rare valuable species. The really dangerous situation would be trying to constantly manoeuvre large construction vehicles through such highly restricted roads with a great deal of pedestrians throughout the whole central area. To construct a development of this size would also create huge issues to create the infrastructure for power gas and water requiring considerable work around the whole area to create the trenches etc required to provide these services !!!! These are just a few of my concerns that suggest this large development is totally impractical and not just a NIMBY series of moans !!!

Comment

Representation ID: 2156

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Claire Brown

I&O_2276
Really don't understand why just a few areas of the county are being lumbered with all the new housing - why can it not be more widely distributed so no community has to take the majority of the burden and lose its access to the greenspaces we love.

Comment

Representation ID: 2176

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Jan Baker

NOR01
I&O_2296
NOR01  - 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), and access to existing village facilities. 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

Comment

Representation ID: 2289

Received: 17/08/2025

Respondent: Peter Manning

I&O_2418
NOR01, NOR11 and NOR12 are all pime green belt and should remain so. If NOR10, NOR11 and NOR12 were developed it would at least double the size of Weaverham, whose resources are already overstretched by visitors from Winnington and Wallerscote, whose developers were allowed to duck their resposibility to provide them. 

Comment

Representation ID: 2327

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Rebecca Griffiths

NOR01
I&O_2456
NOR01 – North East of Barnton : Although currently designated as Green Belt, this site merits reconsideration due to its proximity to the A559 and existing village amenities. The landscape impact would be minimal, and the site could accommodate a diverse housing mix in line with Local Plan requirements.

Comment

Representation ID: 2352

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Mr David Philip Heale

I&O_2481
FRO01 and FRO02 - Frodsham Development Proposals - The fields off Langdale Way and Townfield Lane I am writing to object to the above housing development proposals, for the following reasons - The development of housing, so close to the ancient woodland of Hob Hey, would be extremely damaging. It would also destroy the wildlife corridors around Hob Hey Wood. It is a very special place, that is cherished by the local residents and others. The extra traffic would add considerably, to what is already a congested part of Frodsham. Access from these proposed sites would be down Langdale Way/Grasmere Road and Townfield Lane. The Langdale Way/Grasmere Road traffic merges on to Fluin Lane and then to the junction at the main road to the M56. These two junctions are already very busy and the extra traffic from the proposed housing would make them extremely congested. Access via Townfield Lane would be even worse, as it is essentially a single lane road, in a number of places and any extra traffic would make it virtually impassable. Frodsham is already used as a diversion when the M56 gets blocked, or just when it gets busy in the summer/weekends and has become gridlocked on a number of occasions since we moved here, in the last three and a half years. Emergency response times would be seriously impacted. There would be extra strain on The Knowle surgery, which serves Frodsham, which has already reported growing delays, due to patient volume. School places at Helsby High school and local Primary schools are already near capacity.  There would be an increased flood risk, due to concreting/tarmacking these fields. In 1990 - 2005 there were multiple sewerage floods on Langdale Way, which resulted in a campaign, including the local council and United Utilities, to resolve the issue. It took a year, whilst huge tanks were installed in Manor House school fields, to stop the damaging floods. This situation could occur again, with the building of the proposed number of houses. There are better options available. On the Kingsley side of town and down by the Netherton Hall area.  I feel that these are the main issues that need to be considered and upon which I base my objection. 

Comment

Representation ID: 2381

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Steve Baker

NOR01
I&O_2510
NOR01 - Although currently identified as a green belt site, the expansion to the Northeast of Barnton should be considered, due to its proximity to major transport links (A559), and access to existing village facilities. It would have minimal impact on the surrounding landscape. It would also provide an opportunity to deliver a mix of housing, as per the Local Plan requirements.  

Comment

Representation ID: 2389

Received: 13/08/2025

Respondent: Helen Walters

I&O_2518
Why are we having to give up our green belt land for more housing in Weaverham. The village is already big enough and we should not have to give up our lovely green belt land for housing developers profit. They say they will build affordable houses but what is affordable housing. My son is trying to get on the housing ladder and the affordable houses available in the area are a silly price. The facilities in the village cannot cope with the demands already so more housing would stretch these facilities to the maximum and this will be at the expense of the people who already live in Weaverham. Doctors, dentists, schools. The traffic is already busy travelling through the village. The state of the roads can prove that. England should not be put under all this pressure to accommodate people from other countries. I am not racist by far but we cannot continue to give up our country for outsiders. We have limited green belt land left and developers need to leave the countryside alone to allow the environment to continue providing habitats and homes where nature can continue to grow and look after our natural world around us. More houses come with more traffic so more pollution to the environment. The areas that are up for proposal of planning are areas that the public use to enjoy walks and nature.  If we continue to allow these developers to build on our green belt land then there will be no natural environment around us to enjoy and provide habitats for our wildlife.  I appose all the possible planning applications being put forward around Weaverham. We are a small community village. Leave us as we are and don’t let us become a town or city with no natural environment to enjoy.