Comment

Representation ID: 10483

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Tanya Leonard

I&O_10981
Of the three areas identified, FRO01 and FRO02 are completely unsuitable. Proposing FRO01 and FRO02 is a terrible idea. It adds pressure to failing infrastructure. It increases flood risk. It destroys wildlife corridors. It worsens air quality. It lowers property values. It puts lives at risk. It benefits developers and damages communities. This is not sustainable. It is not justified. It is not acceptable. FRO03 is the best (meaning least worst) identified option assuming the development is suitably sized, and that traffic can enter the site without congestion. However, I feel that the land to the south of Lady Hayes (the other side of the B5152) would also be suitable. Huge area which adjoins the B5152 for good access to Frodsham and Kingsley. Although it is about two miles from Frodsham Train Station, using the iTravel bus this journey could be completed in just a few minutes allowing residents to use the train if they can/wish to do so.

Comment

Representation ID: 10503

Received: 27/08/2025

Respondent: Debbie Gayle

I&O_11001
As a frequent visitor to the Frodsham and as a property owner in the area l am writing to state my objections to the proposed building of new housing stock on the 3 sites in Frodsham;  namely SS41,SS42 and SS43. Frodsham will lose ancient woodland due to the destruction of Hob Hey Wood. In addition the rare species and other wildlife will be adversely affected due to lose of habitat and light pollution.  The increase in numbers of houses without the necessary infrastructure will result in clusters of families isolated from the wider communities leading to an inevitable rise in antisocial behaviour, not to mention lack of resources on the already stressed education, health and social care services. Traffic in the area is already at breaking point at several times during the week and as soon as there are problems on the M56, traffic diverts through the town causing mayhem and  protracted delayes. The increase in housing will only worsen an already unacceptable problem.  There is also an increased risk of flooding, an increase in air pollution and a decrease in property value. I object to these proposals.

Comment

Representation ID: 10630

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Helen Dodd

FRO01 FRO02 FRO03
I&O_11128
FRO01 and FRO02 are completely unsuitable; FR002 relies on the road B5152 and is completely not fit for purpose, contains green belt land, a wildlife corridor,  and is extremely important to the visitor economy and visual aesthetics of the Sandstone Trail. FR001 presents a flood risk, and the loss of wildlife, ancient woodland, and habitat from the neighbouring Hob Hey Wood would be detrimental to the entire Frodsham community. FRO03 would be considered the most suitable, but only in a considered and meaningful way. FRO03 has access to the A56, but urban sprawl would damage the image and character of Frodsham, and there is a need to retain a large buffer zone between the two distinctive towns of Helsby and Frodsham. FRO03 would need significant investment in the road infrastructure to handle the additional road traffic, and an increase in conurbations here should be done on a limited scale.  The B5152 is a relatively winding narrow road with pavement on only one side at points and is not suitable to accommodate such additional traffic. 

Comment

Representation ID: 10697

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Rachel Downham

I&O_11195
I am writing to formally object to the proposed developments set out under Policies SS41, SS42 and SS43 relating to land by Hob Hey Wood in Frodsham. Hob Hey Wood is one of Frodsham’s most valuable community and environmental assets. It is an ancient woodland, a designated Local Nature Reserve, and an irreplaceable habitat for a wide range of wildlife. The proposals to build on the neighbouring land raise serious concerns on several grounds: Environmental impact Ancient woodlands are protected due to their ecological and historical importance. Any development nearby risks damaging the delicate ecosystems, root systems, and biodiversity that have developed over centuries. Building in this area threatens habitats for bats, owls, woodpeckers, amphibians, and other species that depend on Hob Hey Wood’s unique environment. Development would likely increase noise, light pollution, and chemical run-off, all of which would degrade the woodland. Flooding and water management Hob Hey Wood plays a critical role in natural drainage and flood prevention for the surrounding area. Developing adjacent land could increase the risk of flooding for Frodsham residents, particularly as climate change intensifies rainfall. The site acts as a natural carbon sink and water filter, helping to manage air and water quality locally. Community and heritage value Hob Hey Wood is used by local residents for walking, wellbeing, education, and recreation. It is a vital community green space that supports mental and physical health. The wood forms part of Frodsham’s cultural and historical heritage; its loss or degradation would irreversibly diminish the character of the town. Policy and planning considerations National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that development should not result in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats such as ancient woodland, except in wholly exceptional circumstances. There are alternative brownfield and less sensitive sites within Cheshire West that would be far more appropriate for development and would meet housing or commercial needs without destroying critical natural assets. Traffic and infrastructure Additional development in this area would place significant strain on local roads, schools, and health services, which are already under pressure. There are already substantial housing developments underway in nearby Helsby, which will add further demand on local infrastructure that already struggles to cope with the existing population. The proposed site does not have sustainable transport links, leading to further car dependency and increased emissions. Conclusion Hob Hey Wood and the surrounding land should be protected for future generations. Once destroyed, ancient woodland and its ecosystems cannot be replaced. I therefore urge the Council to reject the proposals under Policies SS41, SS42 and SS43, and to ensure Hob Hey Wood and the surrounding area remains safeguarded as a vital natural, cultural, and community asset for Frodsham and the surrounding area. 

Comment

Representation ID: 10725

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Cheryl Lockley

FRO01 FRO02
I&O_11223
I would like to add my objection to the above planning policy relating to Hob Hey Wood Ref FRO01 and FRO02.

Comment

Representation ID: 10729

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Andrew & Emily Griffiths

I&O_11227
I am writing to formally object to the proposed development on Green Belt land next to Hob Hey Wood under policies SS41, SS42, and SS43. I strongly oppose this plan for the following reasons: • Increased Flood Risk: Building on this land would heighten the risk of flooding in the local area, putting homes and infrastructure at risk. • Traffic & Gridlock: Frodsham’s roads are already under pressure, and additional housing will cause further congestion and delays. • Pressure on Public Services: Local GPs, dentists, and schools are already stretched. This development would place further strain on vital services. • Environmental & Wildlife Impact: Hob Hey Wood is an important ecological site. Development would destroy wildlife corridors, damage ancient woodland, and threaten local biodiversity. • Air Quality & Light Pollution: More housing will worsen air quality and increase light pollution, harming both people and wildlife. • Falling House Prices & Community Impact: The loss of countryside and green space will reduce the attractiveness of the area, affecting property values and community wellbeing. The Green Belt exists to protect the countryside, prevent urban sprawl, and safeguard areas like Hob Hey Wood for future generations. Once it is lost, it cannot be replaced. For these reasons, I urge Cheshire West & Chester Council to reject the proposed development and protect our countryside.

Comment

Representation ID: 10780

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Victoria Twist

FRO01, FRO02, FRO03
I&O_11278
The land off Chester Road is unsuitable for several reasons: - The area is already a high flood risk area that floods every year from the bottom of Matty's Lane, down godscroft lane to where it exits at Chester Road. Building here would further increase this flood risk.  - Added pressure to already failing increasing infrastructure (GP appointments for example, public transport service) - Chester Road already becomes heavily backed up with traffic from Helsby to Frodsham whenever there is an issue on the M56 - more homes on this road would only add to this.  - It risks destroying wildlife corridors as the green belt land connects the marshes to other protected land (Frodsham woods) The land adjoining hob hey wood if built on would have a severe impact on ancient woodland. Hob Hey is a site of biological interest. The woodland is home to thousands of species and is enjoyed by local people. I think the proposal to develop on green belt land is ludacris and deviods any point of land ever being protected in the first place if the government can just change their mind. Green belt is in place to protect our access to open air space, protect wildlife and it also protects what makes Frodsham an attractive area to live in as it offers both connection to nature and countryside but also close links to cities. To start building on green belt land would take this away and sets a dangerous precedent. We need a council and government who will advocate for living in harmony with nature, rather than against it. 

Comment

Representation ID: 10801

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Ian Boulton

I&O_11299
I wish to object to Buildng plans next to Hob Hey wood 

Comment

Representation ID: 10812

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Vince and Bev Akers

I&O_11310
I am contacting you regarding policies SS41, SS42, and SS43. I would like to stress that I am in total opposition to these matters for the following reasons. Please ad the following salient comments to your growing list of objections. Having worked in Agriculture during my formative years in the locality and, having watched crops be grown and harvested on most of the fields within the plans, it would be a total loss of good grade agricultural land, which I believe the majority of which is protected Green Belt land, new land cannot be found to replace fields. Many of the fields have ponds within them which are valuable to native wildlife. Many of the fields have public footpaths crossing them which are a valuable asset to local residents.  Some of the areas border Hob Hey Wood which I am sure you will be aware is  ancient woodland, another valuable asset to the area which is home to a vast array of wildlife flora and fauna and is enjoyed by large numbers of locals for daily exercise. The woodland is maintained by a large group of volunteers. Fields around the woodland provide wildlife corridors. Any large scale construction would disturb all of the above. We cannot allow anything to damage the area of Antient Woodland. Loss of public space and a potential drop in house prices. A  large housing development  would increase run off from the roads which could pose further risks to wildlife. The roads in and around Frodsham barley cope with the traffic levels that we currently have so, to add a hundred houses would potentially add 100 to 200 car journeys per day on local roads, add a thousand houses and this could result in 1000 to 2000 journeys per day as an absolute minimum. Furthermore this could easily be doubled or trebled taking into account journeys to work, shopping, school or medical appointments. This would be further exacerbated if there are problems which often occur when there are problems on the M56 Motorway. Currently, there is limited availability in Schools, Doctors and Dentists. Any development would require the existing services to be increased to cope. Degradation of air quality and increased light pollution. The local roads, Ellis Lane, Langdale way, Townfield Lane, Bradley Lane and Kingsley road only just cope with current traffic levels.  There is a very large development of properties in the neighbouring village of Helsby which remain unsold and there is also an application for 91 properties to be build on land opposite Castle Park which both need to be taken into account. My 8 year old granddaughter would like to add that she loves visiting Hob Hey Wood and does not want to see any construction on the surrounding fields.

Comment

Representation ID: 10987

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Jack Makin

I&O_11485
I want to formally announce my objection to the following policies in relation to the development of housing on green belt land next to Hob Hey wood. SS41

Comment

Representation ID: 11070

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Claire Silk

I&O_11568
I am objecting to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.  It would be a huge mistake to destroy this woodland area and the habitats of the animals that live there. The road infrastructure couldn’t handle more housing in areas 1 and 2 that are proposed. We have just moved to Frodsham and the biggest draw was the surrounding green areas - these plans would ruin what is special and important to people that live here and also would financially disadvantage everyone as house prices would likely decrease.  There are so many other areas that are available for development, please don’t ruin this one. 

Comment

Representation ID: 11080

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Lilian Ward

SS 41
I&O_11578
I would like to object to policies SS41, SS42 AND SS43 on the following basis:  - Increased flood risk - More gridlock on Frodsham Roads - Strain on GPs, Dentists and Schools  - Destruction of Wildlife Corridors - Damage to Ancient Woodland  - Worse air quality and light pollution  - Falling house prices - Loss of community and Green Space

Comment

Representation ID: 11097

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Valerie Nield

SS 41
I&O_11595
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. This proposal, FRO01 and FRO02, will only exacerbate problems with gridlocked roads, strain on doctors and dentists and schools, not to mention loss of wildlife corridors etc and I totally reject it.

Comment

Representation ID: 11105

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Ken Ward

I&O_11603
I would like to object to the policies SS41, SS42 and SS43 on the following basis: Increase flood risk.  Straight on infrastructure i.e. GPs, Dentists and School s. Destruction of Wildlife Corridors.  Damage to Ancient Woodland.  Worse air quality and light pollution. Falling house prices.  Loss of community and green space. 

Comment

Representation ID: 11151

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Charlie Close

I&O_11649
I am writing to formally object to the proposed policies SS41, SS42 and SS43 , which relate to future housing development around Hob Hey Wood, Frodsham . Hob Hey Wood is a unique and much-valued ancient woodland, serving not only as an important ecological site but also as a vital community green space. The proposed development poses a significant threat to the integrity and character of this area for the following reasons: Environmental Impact Hob Hey Wood is recognised for its biodiversity, supporting a wide range of plant and wildlife species. Any development adjacent to or encroaching upon the woodland risks damaging delicate habitats and disrupting ecological balance. Increased housing would bring additional light, noise, and pollution pressures, threatening the long-term sustainability of the woodland environment. Community and Wellbeing The wood is widely used by residents for recreation, walking, exercise, and wellbeing. Development nearby would fundamentally change the character of the area, reducing public enjoyment and the sense of tranquillity. Green spaces like Hob Hey Wood are increasingly essential for mental health, physical activity, and social cohesion, especially in a growing community like Frodsham. Infrastructure and Sustainability Concerns The local infrastructure, including roads, schools, and healthcare provision, is already under pressure. Additional housing developments under SS41, SS42 and SS43 would exacerbate these challenges without offering sustainable solutions. Development of this scale risks undermining the Council’s own climate and sustainability objectives, contradicting commitments to protect biodiversity and promote a green future. For these reasons, I strongly urge the Council to reconsider and withdraw policies SS41, SS42 and SS43 . Preserving Hob Hey Wood is not only about protecting the environment, but also about safeguarding an irreplaceable community asset for current and future generations. Thank you for considering my objection. I trust that the Council will give due weight to the environmental and social value of Hob Hey Wood and take steps to ensure its protection from development.

Comment

Representation ID: 11206

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Sarah Gunning

FRO01 and FRO02
I&O_11704
I am writing to object strongly to the planning application referenced above for the following planning reasons: Harm to Trees, Hedgerows, and Wildlife The proposed development would result in the loss of mature trees, hedgerows, and natural habitats that support local wildlife. These elements are crucial for biodiversity and cannot be replaced. Green Belt / Countryside Character The land appears to fall within designated Green Belt or countryside protection zones where new development is inappropriate. The proposal would reduce openness and undermine the purpose of protecting the countryside from encroachment.  Adverse Effect on Local Wildlife This wooded green space supports numerous species, and the disruption of this habitat would have a detrimental environmental impact. Landscape and Community Value The site provides a visual and recreational buffer to both residents and wildlife. Its removal would degrade local amenity and character. This countryside and woodland are beloved by many. The area provides rich pleasure and solace to the community while serving as a vital habitat for trees, plants, and wildlife. Research shows that visits to woodlands in England contribute around £162   million per year in terms of mental health benefits alone, underscoring its immense public value Forest Research . Across the UK, woodland recreation and tourism reached nearly 748   million visits , worth £907   million annually Office for National Statistics . Moreover, exposure to woodlands supports cognitive development and lowers emotional and behavioural issues in children and adolescents UK Research and Innovation University College London . Simply put, allowing development here would not only devastate irreplaceable wildlife and natural beauty—but also inflict catastrophic harm on community wellbeing, public health, and the natural balance we rely upon. I urge the Council to refuse permission due to all of the above. I look forward to your acknowledgment of this objection. Please confirm receipt and that it has been taken into consideration. Yours sincerely,

Comment

Representation ID: 11305

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Frodsham Town Council

I&O_11803
None 

Comment

Representation ID: 11461

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Steve Bowle

FRO03, FRO01, FRO02
I&O_11959
FR003 could potentially be developed as near to main road A56 Strongly Object to Fr001 and Fr002 as local roads ( Townfield lane – clue in the wording of the road!) will not cope

Comment

Representation ID: 11541

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: CPRE Cheshire Branch

I&O_12039
The Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan was only ‘made’ as recently as November last year and must be respected. Based on a masterplan developed by AECOM, it identifies six sites, within the settlement boundary, for development (https://frodshamplan.org.uk/).

Comment

Representation ID: 11815

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Alex Watson

SS41
I&O_12313
I would like to register my objection to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.

Comment

Representation ID: 11837

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Lyn Nicholson

FRO01, FRO02, FRO03
I&O_12336
Question SS 41 Which of the identified potential growth areas around Frodsham do you consider to be the most suitable? FFO01 is unsuitable it increases the flood risk. Worsens air quality Destroys wildlife corridors  Lowers property values     FFO02 is unsuitable it increases the flood risk. Worsens air quality Destroys wildlife corridors  Lowers property values FFO03 is the least worst option There is land to the south of Lady Hayes (other side of the B5152) which would also be suitable as long as the iTravel bus is kept on to give people access by public transport to the town and the station

Comment

Representation ID: 11876

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Eric J Wynne

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_12390
As a resident of Frodsham, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed plans and policies laid out in SS41, SS42 and SS43. In addition,  I  am saying NO to Ref.: FRO01 and FRO02. Additional traffic in Frodsham will only add to regular issues of gridlocking the already congested roads.  I believe that schools and doctors surgeries are already at capacity and additional residents would only add to the issues that already exist.   

Comment

Representation ID: 11882

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Janet Wynne

FRO01 and FRO02
I&O_12396
As a Frodsham resident, I am writing to oppose the plans and policies laid out in SS41,SS42 and SS43. In addition I am saying NO to Ref:FRO1 and FRO2. We simply do not have the infrastructure to deal with additional traffic, as the village regularly gets gridlocked.  Schools and Dr's surgeries are all full to capacity.  Destruction of our ancient woodland and wildlife.  These plans must not be passed!!!!

Comment

Representation ID: 11961

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Natalie Smith

I&O_12475
Of the three areas identified, FRO01 and FRO02 are completely unsuitable. Proposing FRO01 and FRO02 is a terrible idea. It adds pressure to failing infrastructure. It increases flood risk. It destroys wildlife corridors. It worsens air quality. It lowers property values. It puts lives at risk. It benefits developers and damages communities. This is not sustainable. It is not justified. It is not acceptable. FRO03 is the best (meaning least worst) identified option assuming the development is suitably sized, and that traffic can enter the site without congestion. However, I feel that the land to the south of Lady Hayes (the other side of the B5152) would also be suitable. Huge area which adjoins the B5152 for good access to Frodsham and Kingsley. Although it is about two miles from Frodsham Train Station, using the iTravel bus this journey could be completed in just a few minutes allowing residents to use the train if they can/wish to do so.  

Comment

Representation ID: 11965

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Karen Kinsey

I&O_12479
Objection to Policies SS41; SS42 and SS43 I am emailing to object to the above policies regarding building permission for the land around Watery Lane and Bradley Lane. This site is within Green Belt, and as such needs to be protected from large scale development such as this. There are many, smaller sites in Frodsham (eg:- behind Main Street, and land adjacent to the Medical Centre) which could be developed without disruption to wildlife and woodland, and would indeed enhance the town centre. These green open spaces for nature are essential for wildlife, woodlands, and the community at large. It’s so important to have public access to these calm and natural areas. if this were to go ahead, it could open the floodgates for all sorts of development on our Greenbelt, wiping away the natural environment. There would have to been serious infrastructure upgrades too ( new roads, drains, electricity supply for example), which would further degrade the countryside ,and cause further problems to our already congested roads. Also, with a large development such as this, how can a small town cope with a large influx of people. The strain on doctors, dentists etc would be immense, and we haven’t got a secondary school anymore, so eduction for children would be greatly impacted. Please think responsibly about what you’re doing to our area. We have to think of future generations, and how they would cope without access the countryside.

Comment

Representation ID: 12005

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Warren Heyes

5.1
I&O_12519
To the planning team I wish to express my objection to the planning proposals for Frodsham and Helsby, particularly to FROO1/FROO2 and policies SS41, SS42, SS43. I am opposed to the proposals to develop two parts of Green Belt land bordering the Hob Hey ancient woodland. My wife and I have lived in Frodsham since 1989 and know the Hob Hey Wood area well. It is very close to where we live. This area of ancient woodland is much valued by the community. It has been purchased in sections by the town council starting in 1992 in an effort to preserve it and the Hob Hey Wood Friends Group of local volunteers work tirelessly to preserve it. As a member of Frodsham and Helsby Rotary, I know we recently donated £1000 to the group to support their much valued work for our community. Many others support its preservation. Hob Hey Wood is a haven for biodiversity and connects with essential wildlife corridors in the surrounding area. It and the wider environment will be hugely damaged if building is allowed on the land around it. The Hob Hey Wood area is near the confluence of a number public footpaths and the area is valued by walkers from all over Cheshire and beyond. The North Cheshire Way, Delamere Way, Eddisbury Way and many local paths run through the area. This is an amenity beneficial to mental and physical health and the loss of community and green space resulting from the proposals would be damaging to the wellbeing of those currently able to access it. Frodsham is described as “a distinctive and attractive  market town with highly valued green spaces which should be protected and any new development should respect the character of Frodsham” (FR1). This proposal would severely impact a valued green space, Hob Hey Wood, use up Green Belt and would not respect the character of Frodsham.  In addition, the Council’s Flood Risk  Assessment  warns against removing the natural barriers provided by Hob Hey wood and the green areas around it, which absorb heavy rain. The Langdale Way area of Frodsham has a history of flooding which was only rectified by major work by United Utilities. The FROO1/2 plans don't take this into account.   I understand the need to build more housing, but I strongly object to building near Hob Hey Wood, causing irreparable damage to one of the most precious areas around Frodsham. The Town Council, Hob Hey Wood Friends Group and the local community have worked to preserve the area for decades, and many in our community will find the building proposals totally unacceptable . I trust you appreciate the strength of feeling about this.

Comment

Representation ID: 12022

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Michele Heyes

I&O_12536
I am submitting my strong objections the planning consultation for CWAC section 5 .1 5.2 Helsby and Frodsham growth area. The purpose of this email is to lodge my objection to the planning proposals for Frodsham and Helsby, with special reference to FROO1/FROO2, SS41, SS42, SS43 I and my husband are long term residents of Frodsham, having lived in Springbourne 1989 and we are very opposed to the proposals to develop two parts of Greenbelt land bordering The Hob Hey ancient woodland, very close to where I live. FROO1/FROO2. Frodsham is described as “a distinctive and attractive  market town with highly valued green spaces which should be protected and any new development should respect the character of Frodsham” (FR1). Yet  this proposal would severely impact a valued green space, Hob Hey Wood , use up Greenbelt and would not respect the character of Frodsham.  This is a firm objection to building on FR001 and FR002, two parcels of land that surround Hob Hey wood. Hob Hey wood is a jewel in Frodsham's crown, an ancient woodland with trees listed in the Woodland trust Ancient Tree Inventory. It is an area enjoyed by both young and old providing a quiet peaceful enviroment to explore and enjoy. There are many public footpaths and long distance footpaths which  cross this area, which is used by many people from Cheshire and beyond. Many people reap the benifits of being in nature such as reduced anxiety and depression, improvements to the immune system and reduced blood pressure result from time spent in nature. There is a huge rise in mental health issues in this country and we must therefore not lose this beautiful ancient woodland which can be used as a tool to support people with these problems. We are encouraged by health officials to go out, to walk and experience the outdoors. Hob Hey is not a decorative patch of trees. It is a functioning woodland used by many species that need access to the surrounding area. The wood connects to wider habitat corridors through the FR001 and FR002 area and these corridors keep the ecology alive. If building were to go ahead it would break these corridors forever and can never be replaced. We can not let Hob Hey wood, this ancient woodland be degraded or  destroyed by the additional housing in these two areas. Hob Hey is a secluded spot. Building houses would lead to significanct disturbance in the woodland and its wildlife. The likely increase in pets such as cats would have a detrimental effect on the wild life, especially the birds. Dogs would also impact on the area with increases in faeces which causes further pollution. SO4 Infrastructure: Ensure that all developments are supported by the necessary infrastructure and services in an effective and timely manner to make development sustainable and minimise its effect on existing communities. The impact on existing communities would would be immense. No part of this development includes concrete plans for new public serices. New homes mean more pressure, more waiting and more stretched services. In a recent talk led by our local PCSO explained that his area had vastly increased and the service was struggling to cover this area. Indeed SS4 states that in smaller settlements, developments should be appropriate in scale and design to conserve the settlements character and setting and should not exceed the capacity of existing services and infrastructure.  The points I have already made regarding FROO1/FROO2 proposals shows how ill conceived the plans are as it would be impossible to meet this objective.The disruption during buiding would not be minimal, as proposed, and important green spaces would be lost for ever. Lives woud be changed.    Traffic - Whenever there is a problem on the M56, traffic is diverted through Frodsham, causing major problems on A56 and surrounding roads with queuing traffic. The development of FROO1/2 would add hundreds more road users in the town, making an already bad situation even worse. Any roadworks on the A 56 generally leads to traffic chaos. Many people already suffer unacceptable delays on a regular basis and emergency vehicles struggle to get through traffic. Small surburban roads flooded with extra vehicles would be both unacceptable and dangerous and all the extra traffic would then have to feed into already busy roads. Frodsham does not need more cars which would lead to gridlock.This development will slow response times for emergency vehicles even more, putting livess at risk. Has there been a feasiblity study into the swing bridge capacity which is the villages link road to the motorway? Air quality and light pollution - Frodsham is already in an Air Quality Management Zone. FR001 and FR 002 would result in more cars leadng to  deterioration in air quality. Additionl lhousing  would result in more light pollution which would affect wildlife.This ruins habitat for nocturnal animals and affects humans. Bats are neting in Hob Hey Wood. Flood risk - The Councils  own Flood Risk  Assessment  warns against removing the natural barriers provided by Hob Hey wood and the green areas around it which act as a sponge, by absorbing heavy rain. The Langdale Way area of Frodsham has a history of flooding which was only rectified by major work by United Utilities. Climate change is happening which is likely to result in more rainfall. Surface water is the biggest threat to homes in England.The FROO1/2 plans don't take this into account.  Falling house prices - People choose to buy houses in Frodsham as they are surrounded by green belt and have access to  open countryside on their door step. if this development goes ahead home owners will lose out and developers will profit. I have outlined the reasons for my objection to the proposals to build on FROO1/FR002 but many of the arguments could be applied to any development in the Helsby and Frodsham area. I hope that due consideration will be given to the objections raised in this email. I  ook forward to your resonse.

Comment

Representation ID: 12045

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Saffron Moorcroft

SS 41
I&O_12559
I strongly object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.

Comment

Representation ID: 12094

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Michael Ward

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_12608
I find the phrasing of this question to be incorrect as it forces a choice of favourite without real consideration of details and impacts (covered in SS42 / SS43).  I appreciate it’s early consultation, but the best solution for Frodsham is “none of the above”, and to stick to the Neighbourhood Plan which has a more sustainable level of growth without impacting green belt or fundamentally impacting the nature of the town, exponential growth in traffic and congestion, or exacerbating existing issues in accessing healthcare, school places, parking, and so on. FR01 and FR02 are especially concerning in terms of: Impact on Hob Hey Wood & related areas including damage to precious ancient woodland Impact on wildlife & wildlife corridors Potential flood risk as this area covers the flow from the existing settlement down to the river Loss of green space and green belt land Materiality of impact of scale of development on Frodsham vs actual need for housing in the borough. Moving the boundaries of Frodsham settlement to those of Runcorn, effectively creating urban sprawl

Comment

Representation ID: 12099

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Paula Fallows

FR001 AND FROO2
I&O_12613
As a resident of Bradley Lane frodsham I am very concerned about the proposed plans to build on our green belt for a number of reasons Frodsham roads already struggle to deal with the amount of traffic without further increases Hob hey wood is filled with wildlife which would be adversely effected Infrastructure in Frodsham - schools, doctors etc are already under strain I am objecting to SS41. , SS42. ,SS43 FR001 AND FROO2