Comment

Representation ID: 11966

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Karen Kinsey

I&O_12480
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: 11970

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Margaret Connor

FRO01 and FRO02
I&O_12484
I am writing to formally object to the proposed development of sites FRO01 and FRO02 in Frodsham. These areas fall within the Green Belt and border Hob Hey Wood, an irreplaceable area of ancient woodland and a valued community green space. I believe the proposals are unsound, unsustainable, and contrary to both local and national planning policy, for the following reasons: 1. Green Belt Protection The sites fall within the Green Belt. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraphs 137–140 make clear that Green Belt can only be released in exceptional circumstances. No such circumstances have been demonstrated here. Development would undermine the permanence of the Green Belt, contribute to urban sprawl, and set a damaging precedent. 2. Unjustified Housing Targets and Alternative Land Supply The housing targets underpinning the Local Plan are significantly higher than ONS household growth projections, and therefore unjustified. Development should prioritise brownfield land and vacant industrial sites within existing settlements, not productive agricultural or Green Belt land. Much of FRO01 and FRO02 comprises best and most versatile agricultural land (Grades 1–3A) that should be protected. 3. Traffic Congestion and Highway Safety Frodsham already experiences severe congestion, particularly when the M56 is closed, when traffic is diverted through the town. A 2022 Highways England report showed traffic increases of 22% during such closures, impacting emergency vehicle access. Additional residential and construction traffic would worsen safety and congestion on already pressured roads such as the A56 and B5152. Cheshire Fire and Rescue have previously raised concerns about response times during peak events. As a resident of Grasmere Road, I can confirm that several times a year the road becomes completely gridlocked with stationary traffic. Although it is normally a very quiet residential street, it is heavily impacted during motorway incidents or local highway works when vehicles are diverted through the town. At peak times – particularly during school drop-off and pick-up at Manor House School – congestion at the exit from the Lakes Estate (Langdale onto Fluin Lane) routinely causes delays of 15 minutes or more. Any further housing on the proposed sites would significantly worsen these already unsustainable traffic pressures. 4. Strain on Local Infrastructure and Services Local services are already overstretched: GP and dental access in Cheshire West are below national averages, with local surgeries facing delays and NHS dentists not taking new patients. Local schools, including Helsby High, are near capacity with no expansion plans. Without significant up-front investment, new housing would place unsustainable strain on health, education, and public services. 5. Flood Risk, Drainage, and Sewage Capacity The proposed development would replace permeable land with hard surfaces, increasing runoff, surface water flooding, and sewer overload. Residents recall repeated sewer flooding in Langdale Way in the late 1990s–2000s, which required major intervention by United Utilities. Building on adjacent land risks a repeat of these problems. 6. Biodiversity, Ancient Woodland, and Wildlife Corridors Hob Hey Wood is a designated Site of Biological Interest and an irreplaceable ancient woodland, home to over 800 recorded species, including nationally rare and locally scarce wildlife. Development on FRO01 and FRO02 threatens: Wildlife Corridors: Hedgerows and green links vital for species movement. Pollution: Runoff, vehicle emissions, and light pollution would degrade habitats. Disturbance: Increased human and pet activity would disrupt sensitive species, including bats (seven species recorded, including rare Nathusius’ pipistrelle) and invertebrates. Once lost, ancient woodland cannot be replaced, making this a direct conflict with NPPF policy to protect irreplaceable habitats. 7. Loss of Community Green Space Hob Hey Wood and its surrounding fields are widely used by local residents for recreation, walking, and wellbeing. Studies consistently show that access to natural green space improves physical and mental health. Development here would permanently reduce the availability of safe, accessible green space for the community. 8. Unsustainable Spatial Strategy CWAC’s strategy of concentrating growth around railway stations ignores the inadequacy of the local transport network. Trains to major cities are infrequent and overcrowded, while local roads are not designed for cycling or increased car use. This approach is unrealistic and contrary to the NPPF’s requirement that development be sustainable both environmentally and socially. 9. Conflict with Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan The Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan, a legally significant local policy, prioritises the protection of green spaces, enhancement of biodiversity, and management of traffic. Development of FRO01 and FRO02 conflicts with these aims and should therefore be refused. 10. Concerns About the Consultation Process Residents who attended the CWAC consultation Q&A session in Winsford reported deeply concerning levels of unpreparedness and misinformation: Staff appeared unaware of the true location, biodiversity value, and ancient woodland status of Hob Hey. Hedgerows, ponds, tree preservation orders, and flood risks were not acknowledged. The decision to hold the Q&A in Winsford, away from Frodsham residents most directly affected, limited local engagement. This raises serious questions about the adequacy and transparency of the consultation process. At best, it suggests a lack of due diligence; at worst, it implies an attempt to minimise local scrutiny of unsuitable site allocations. Either way, this undermines public confidence and should be taken into account when considering the soundness of the Local Plan. Conclusion The proposed development of FRO01 and FRO02 is unsound and contrary to multiple provisions of the NPPF and the Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan. It would cause unacceptable harm to the Green Belt, biodiversity, ancient woodland, flood resilience, local infrastructure, and community wellbeing. For these reasons, I strongly urge that the application be refused and that development be redirected towards brownfield sites within existing settlements.

Comment

Representation ID: 11981

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Steve Riches

I&O_12495
I am writing to formally object to the proposed development of sites FRO01 and FRO02 in Frodsham. These areas fall within the Green Belt and border Hob Hey Wood, an irreplaceable area of ancient woodland and a valued community green space. I believe the proposals are unsound, unsustainable, and contrary to both local and national planning policy, for the following reasons: 1. Green Belt Protection The sites fall within the Green Belt. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraphs 137–140 make clear that Green Belt can only be released in exceptional circumstances. No such circumstances have been demonstrated here. Development would undermine the permanence of the Green Belt, contribute to urban sprawl, and set a damaging precedent. 2. Unjustified Housing Targets and Alternative Land Supply The housing targets underpinning the Local Plan are significantly higher than ONS household growth projections, and therefore unjustified. Development should prioritise brownfield land and vacant industrial sites within existing settlements, not productive agricultural or Green Belt land. Much of FRO01 and FRO02 comprises best and most versatile agricultural land (Grades 1–3A) that should be protected. 3. Traffic Congestion and Highway Safety Frodsham already experiences severe congestion, particularly when the M56 is closed, when traffic is diverted through the town. A 2022 Highways England report showed traffic increases of 22% during such closures, impacting emergency vehicle access. Additional residential and construction traffic would worsen safety and congestion on already pressured roads such as the A56 and B5152. Cheshire Fire and Rescue have previously raised concerns about response times during peak events. As a resident of Langdale Way area, I can confirm that several times a year the road becomes completely gridlocked with stationary traffic. Although it is normally a very quiet residential street, it is heavily impacted during motorway incidents or local highway works when vehicles are diverted through the town. At peak times – particularly during school drop-off and pick-up at Manor House School – congestion at the exit from the Lakes Estate (Langdale onto Fluin Lane) routinely causes delays of 15 minutes or more. Any further housing on the proposed sites would significantly worsen these already unsustainable traffic pressures. 4. Strain on Local Infrastructure and Services Local services are already overstretched: GP and dental access in Cheshire West are below national averages, with local surgeries facing delays and NHS dentists not taking new patients. Local schools, including Helsby High, are near capacity with no expansion plans. Without significant up-front investment, new housing would place unsustainable strain on health, education, and public services. 5. Flood Risk, Drainage, and Sewage Capacity The proposed development would replace permeable land with hard surfaces, increasing runoff, surface water flooding, and sewer overload. Residents recall repeated sewer flooding in Langdale Way in the late 1990s–2000s, which required major intervention by United Utilities. Building on adjacent land risks a repeat of these problems. 6. Biodiversity, Ancient Woodland, and Wildlife Corridors Hob Hey Wood is a designated Site of Biological Interest and an irreplaceable ancient woodland, home to over 800 recorded species, including nationally rare and locally scarce wildlife. Development on FRO01 and FRO02 threatens: Wildlife Corridors: Hedgerows and green links vital for species movement.  Pollution: Runoff, vehicle emissions, and light pollution would degrade habitats. Disturbance: Increased human and pet activity would disrupt sensitive species, including bats (seven species recorded, including rare Nathusius’ pipistrelle) and invertebrates. Once lost, ancient woodland cannot be replaced, making this a direct conflict with NPPF policy to protect irreplaceable habitats. 7. Loss of Community Green Space Hob Hey Wood and its surrounding fields are widely used by local residents for recreation, walking, and wellbeing. Studies consistently show that access to natural green space improves physical and mental health. Development here would permanently reduce the availability of safe, accessible green space for the community. 8. Unsustainable Spatial Strategy CWAC’s strategy of concentrating growth around railway stations ignores the inadequacy of the local transport network. Trains to major cities are infrequent and overcrowded, while local roads are not designed for cycling or increased car use. This approach is unrealistic and contrary to the NPPF’s requirement that development be sustainable both environmentally and socially. 9. Conflict with Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan The Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan, a legally significant local policy, prioritises the protection of green spaces, enhancement of biodiversity, and management of traffic. Development of FRO01 and FRO02 conflicts with these aims and should therefore be refused. 10. Concerns About the Consultation Process Residents who attended the CWAC consultation Q&A session in Winsford reported deeply concerning levels of unpreparedness and misinformation: Staff appeared unaware of the true location, biodiversity value, and ancient woodland status of Hob Hey. Hedgerows, ponds, tree preservation orders, and flood risks were not acknowledged. The decision to hold the Q&A in Winsford, away from Frodsham residents most directly affected, limited local engagement. This raises serious questions about the adequacy and transparency of the consultation process. At best, it suggests a lack of due diligence; at worst, it implies an attempt to minimise local scrutiny of unsuitable site allocations. Either way, this undermines public confidence and should be taken into account when considering the soundness of the Local Plan. Conclusion The proposed development of FRO01 and FRO02 is unsound and contrary to multiple provisions of the NPPF and the Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan. It would cause unacceptable harm to the Green Belt, biodiversity, ancient woodland, flood resilience, local infrastructure, and community wellbeing. For these reasons, I strongly urge that the application be refused and that development be redirected towards brownfield sites within existing settlements.

Comment

Representation ID: 11987

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Carmel Ord

FRO01
I&O_12501
To whom it may concern. I am expressing my objection to the proposed house builds on Hop hey woods. For the following reasons. To protect the UKs woodlands, wildlife and the health of present population and generations to come. We have the least amount of nature reserves etc in the whole of Europe. We cannot afford to lose anymore and planners need to think differently and environmentally. 

Comment

Representation ID: 12007

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Warren Heyes

5.1
I&O_12521
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: 12026

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Michele Heyes

I&O_12540
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: 12031

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Dave McGown

I&O_12545
we regularly walk our dog around Hob Hey Wood Objection to SS41,SS42,and SS43 Things to consider More Gridlock on already Busy Frodsham Raods increased flood risk strain on GP'S,Dentists& Schools Destruction of wildlife corridors Damage to Ancient Woodland Worse air quality Falling House Prices Loss of community & Green Space

Comment

Representation ID: 12047

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Saffron Moorcroft

SS 42
I&O_12561
I strongly object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.

Comment

Representation ID: 12095

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Michael Ward

I&O_12609
Main concerns are scale of development and impacts this has on the town, its infrastructure and its amenities.  It appears to be prioritising locality to a train station above more practical and pressing matters about the impact on the town’s infrastructure and amenities, and how these (and the public transport that runs along the transport corridor) could be or should be developed. The issues the proposals raise are: Green belt impact – green belt boundaries should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified - there are no such circumstances warranting such impacts, and as the wider consultation shows, there are a very large number of alternatives in (e.g.) grey belt areas that exist. Impact on green space, ancient woodland and wildlife rich areas by development to the boundaries of places such as Hob Hey Wood Traffic (Frodsham is already frequently gridlocked) & resulting air quality Transport (the trains in service are already packed / standing room only in peak times) School provision (especially in secondary education as Frodsham has lost its secondary school) Doctors & dentists (like many areas, it’s almost impossible to access GP services at the point of need with today’s population) Impacts on other amenities within the town – parking, supermarket (the current Morrisons site is not designed for a town that size), green spaces.  Frodsham’s existing neighbourhood plan, which has several sites (largely brownfield) that would be suitable to provide the housing needs for the foreseeable future, and has only recently been developed at presumably substantial cost and effort, is a

Comment

Representation ID: 12100

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Paula Fallows

FR001 AND FROO2
I&O_12614
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

Comment

Representation ID: 12137

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mr and Mrs David G and Eileen M Sparke

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_12651
When you look at the proposed FRO01 and FRO02 areas for housing development they make absolutely no sense at all. The only access to FRO01 would be through the existing minor road network in the built up “Lakes” area, which would be completely unsafe and unsuitable. The only other possible route might be to use the unadopted Ellis Lane to the North of that area. However this could not be widened and comes out on a sharp bend and steep slope onto the A56. With regard to the FRO02 area the only access in and out would again involve the minor roads in the “Lakes” area or onto the minor Bradley Lane road. As its name implies it is basically a narrow country lane with one single track section that it would be impossible to widen due to the existing housing. Any attempt to use these roads would result in chaos and gridlock at their exits onto any of the main roads through and into Frodsham.

Comment

Representation ID: 12148

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Dave Upton

I&O_12662
I would like to give my support for this project.   We need more homes in the local area for the next generation as long as it is proportionate. Not everyone in Frodsham is against development.  

Comment

Representation ID: 12153

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Ivor Davies

I&O_12667
I would like to object to Policies SS41,SS42 and SS43 in my opinion is an ill thought out proposal and will severely impact a precious local ecosystem of Hob Hey wood as well as encroaching on our precious Green Belt areas . It will mean more gridlock on already busy roads and a strain on our local Doctors, Dentists and Schools .

Comment

Representation ID: 12178

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Jayne Wilson

I&O_12692
Main concerns are scale of development and impacts this has on the town, its infrastructure and its amenities.  It appears to be prioritising locality to a train station above more practical and pressing matters about the impact on the town’s infrastructure and amenities, and how these (and the public transport that runs along the transport corridor) could be or should be developed. The issues the proposals raise are: · Green belt impact – green belt boundaries should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified - there are no such circumstances warranting such impacts, and as the wider consultation shows, there are a very large number of alternatives in (e.g.) grey belt areas that exist. · Impact on green space, ancient woodland and wildlife rich areas by development to the boundaries of places such as Hob Hey Wood · Traffic (Frodsham is already frequently gridlocked) & resulting air quality · Transport (the trains in service are already packed / standing room only in peak times) · School provision (especially in secondary education as Frodsham has lost its secondary school) · Doctors & dentists (like many areas, it’s almost impossible to access GP services at the point of need with today’s population) · Impacts on other amenities within the town – parking, supermarket (the current Morrisons site is not designed for a town that size), green spaces.  The issues the proposals raise are: · Green belt impact – green belt boundaries should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidenced and justified - there are no such circumstances warranting such impacts, and as the wider consultation shows, there are a very large number of alternatives in (e.g.) grey belt areas that exist. · Impact on green space, ancient woodland and wildlife rich areas by development to the boundaries of places such as Hob Hey Wood · Traffic (Frodsham is already frequently gridlocked) & resulting air quality · Transport (the trains in service are already packed / standing room only in peak times) · School provision (especially in secondary education as Frodsham has lost its secondary school) · Doctors & dentists (like many areas, it’s almost impossible to access GP services at the point of need with today’s population) · Impacts on other amenities within the town – parking, supermarket (the current Morrisons site is not designed for a town that size), green spaces.  Frodsham’s existing neighbourhood plan, which has several sites (largely brownfield) that would be suitable to provide the housing needs for the foreseeable future, and has only recently been developed at presumably substantial cost and effort, is still relevant     

Comment

Representation ID: 12183

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Jasmine Sproston

I&O_12697
Yes, don’t build on FRO01 and FRO02. This is not a polite suggestion. It is a firm and direct objection to building on FR001 and FR002, two parcels of Greenbelt land that border Hob Hey Wood and form part of Frodsham’s only remaining rural buffer. This proposal is a textbook example of poor planning: it increases flood risk, overloads roads, strains local services, destroys wildlife routes, and rips up national policy. If approved, it will damage the town and everyone in it. Objections in detail Severe Impact on Ancient Woodland Hob Hey is a Site of Biological Interest and ancient woodland, Britain’s most biodiverse habitat. The wood is home to thousands of species varying from common, to locally scarce, to nationally rare. Over 800 species are listed on the national biological recording site iRecord. Many species only occur in ancient woodland, an increasingly rare habitat. The wood is a haven for both wildlife and local people who enjoy walking the woodland and reaping the benefits of being in nature such as reduced anxiety and depression. Improvements to the immune system and reduced blood pressure also result from time spent in nature. Source: Nature and Mental Health Report’, Mind. Source: ( https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9665958/ ). Wildlife Corridors Will Be Destroyed Hob Hey Wood is not a decorative patch of trees. It is a functioning woodland used by many species that need access to the surrounding environment. The wood connects to wider habitat corridors through the FR001 and FR002 areas. These corridors keep the ecology alive. Building here breaks those links forever. You can’t replace a hedgerow or regenerate a breeding ground once it’s buried under concrete. Source: Planning Inspectorate – https://nsip-documents.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/published-documents/EN010153-000069-6.1_ES%20Vol%201%20Chapter%207%20Terrestrial%20Ecology.pdf Significant Disturbance to The Woodland Hob Hey is relatively secluded. Building hundreds of houses nearby could lead to significant disturbance of the woodland and its wildlife. The resulting huge increase in pets would result in problems. Cats are supreme predators which would take a toll on wildlife. Dogs would also disturb wildlife and their feces have been shown to cause nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. Source: https://www.theguardian.com/.../dog-pee-and-poo-harming ... Flood Risk is Not a Hypothetical Surface water flooding is the biggest threat to homes in England today. Over 4.6 million homes are now at risk from it. That’s double the number at risk from rivers or coastal surge. In Frodsham, those risks already exist. Hob Hey Wood and the green land around it act as a sponge. They slow rain and reduce flood peaks. Building on FR002 and FR001 means water runs off faster, overloading drains and pushing into homes and roads. The council’s own Flood Risk Assessment warns against removing these natural barriers. From the late 1990’s to 2005 this happened in Langdale Way! Residents experienced multiple sewerage floods leading to a campaign involving both the council and United Utilities to resolve the issue before the houses became uninsurable. This resulted in a year long disruptive excavation at Manor House School fields to install huge tanks to stem the catastrophic floods. UU stated that this was the only site that that type of construction could take place. House building adjacent could result in these issues arising again! Source: Cheshire West SFRA – https://www.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/documents/parking-roads-and-travel/highways/flood-risk-assessment-final-report.pdf Source: Financial Times – https://www.ft.com/content/ff3bb769-9339-4015-80bc-4a3ea446504e

Comment

Representation ID: 12187

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Alison Tyghe

I&O_12701
Policy objections SS41, SS42,SS43  I feel very strongly about the traffic increase especially when the M56 is congested, causing gridlock. Also losing more green space that should be preserved.

Comment

Representation ID: 12190

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Jeff Hook

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_12704
I object and say NO to REF:FRO01 and FRO02.

Comment

Representation ID: 12193

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mark Vallely

FRO01 and FRO02
I&O_12707
Initial thoughts I have been living with my partner on Townfield Lane, Frodsham now for the last 24 years. Imagine my surprise when out of the blue I found a locally printed flyer strapped to a bench at the end of the road informing me that the green and pleasant land I have grown to love whilst walking our dog over those years, has now been proposed as fertile, not just for growing crops as it currently is, but also it seems, for growing new builds. Scouring the internet I find that the areas FRO01 and FRO02 alone could maybe support 1338 dwellings and, if we additionally take area FRO03 (the other side of Frodsham), then this total could rise to 2011 dwellings. That’s a lot of houses. If we look at the 2021 census, we find the population of Frodsham is around 9300, which the latest housing data suggests reside in approximately 4,435 households – an average household size of just over 2 people. If we add an additional 2011 households then simple maths implies you’ve just increased the size of Frodsham over 1.4 times . That’s nearly half again! There can be no doubt that this would be a collossal shock to both the infrastructure and character of one of Cheshire’s more prominent market towns, an important town which at the time of the census was deemed small enough to feel local, but large enough to support a vibrant mix of independent shops, pubs, and community events. It’s also tragic that my neighbours and I must find out something potentially this seismic from a local action group or by word of mouth, only 2 weeks before the deadline to object, as opposed to some form of official individual communication to each affected party by the council, giving adequate time to focus our thoughts on this rather important subject.  As such, I object to any planned development within Frodsham Areas FRO01 and FRO02 and my reasonings fall under 2 main headings…  Hob Hey Wood and surroundings We were warned by the current government from the start to expect changes to planning laws. We were told that a new category of land would be created - Grey Belt - which includes underused or derelict sites, and can be repurposed for housing. We were told that there would be a Brownfield First Approach of previously developed urban land for fast-tracked housing project We were told that this allows development without compromising protected Green Belt areas, although admittedly there were hints that in certain circumstances green  belt land would be considered for building. And yet in no time at all Cheshire West And Chester are already considering riding rough shod over green belt land such as that surrounding Hob Hey Wood - one of the last remaining tracts of ancient woodland in Cheshire, now included on the official register of Ancient Woodland, and land which should obviously merit special consideration status under any circumstances. Cheshire has long been one of the least wooded counties in Britain. Historically, ancient woodland covered only 0.7% of the county,  a striking contrast to the national average of around 10% cover. Which means our few tracts of remaining woodland are extremely precious, even more so knowing that ancient woodland is the most ecologically valuable there is. Hob Hey Wood is not just a decorative patch of trees. It is a functioning woodland used by many species that need access to the surrounding environment. The wood connects to wider habitat corridors through the FR001 and FR002 areas. These corridors keep the ecology alive . Currently Hob Hey is relatively secluded. Building hundreds of houses nearby cannot help but lead to significant disturbance of the woodland and its wildlife as it is reduced to housing estate land for leisure. If Cheshire West And Chester were to deem it acceptable to destroy such ecologically, environmentally and historically important green belt land then a dangerous precedent will have been set. General public perception would logically  deduce that appeals to protect  Green belt land would henceforth be pointless since by definition "green belt land" would then signify merely the current state of land of no special status and which may be given over to development at any time and at the whim of the current ruling body. Maybe that’s the idea all along.

Comment

Representation ID: 12197

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Richard McLaren

I&O_12711
Yes, don’t build on FRO01 and FRO02. This is not a polite suggestion. It is a firm and direct objection to building on FR001 and FR002, two parcels of Greenbelt land that border Hob Hey Wood and form part of Frodsham’s only remaining rural buffer. This proposal is a textbook example of poor planning: it increases flood risk, overloads roads, strains local services, destroys wildlife routes, and rips up national policy. If approved, it will damage the town and everyone in it.

Comment

Representation ID: 12202

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Samantha Robinson

I&O_12716
Yes, don’t build on FRO01 and FRO02. This is not a polite suggestion. It is a firm and direct objection to building on FR001 and FR002, two parcels of Greenbelt land that border Hob Hey Wood and form part of Frodsham’s only remaining rural buffer. This proposal is a textbook example of poor planning: it increases flood risk, overloads roads, strains local services, destroys wildlife routes, and rips up national policy. If approved, it will damage the town and everyone in it.

Comment

Representation ID: 12204

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Val Hook

FRO01 and FRO02
I&O_12718
I object and say NO to REF:FRO01 and FRO02.

Comment

Representation ID: 12208

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Erica Davies

SS 42
I&O_12722
I object strongly to this proposal which would have devastating effects on the local area. The potential damage to the ancient woodland would be extreme, destroying the habitat of much wildlife and contributing to environmental breakdown. The loss of this area to the community would be unimaginable. Frodsham is a small market town - it does not have to capacity to support the increased population this would bring in the form of gridlock on already busy roads and more pressure on already over subscribed GPs, dentists and schools.

Comment

Representation ID: 12236

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Van Bishop

I&O_12750
Objections to Frodsham developments:- SS41,SS42 and SS43 urgent! I am objecting to the appalling planning proposals to build hundreds of homes on protected Green Belt Land on and around the ancient woodland Hob Hey Wood in Frodsham Cheshire and the farmland around Dig Lane. INCREASED FLOOD RISK Frodsham is already prone to flooding and there will be an increased flood risk with so many new homes. Many of the fields are already flooded on a semi permanent basis - historically the sea used to come up to the houses. Frodsham is well known for its marshes. GRIDLOCK The Spacial Strategy for building near public transport does not work in Frodsham for so many new residents. Trains are infrequent and unreliable to a limited number of destinations. Cycling is difficult and dangerous for most people as the area is exceptionally hilly with narrow winding roads. People rely mainly on cars. PROXIMITY TOTHE M56 But the key transport issue is that the town is already frequently gridlocked as cars come off the M56 junction as a detour if there are delays which happen a few times a week. The road is a main route to North Wales and both Liverpool and Manchester airports. WEEKENDS ARE ESPECIALLY BAD. * This is a nightmare as people can’t get in or out and it is a regular occurrence as there is only one main road off the motorway WHICH IS THE MAIN ROAD WHICH TRAFFIC HAS TO USE FOR CONSTRUCTION AND THEN FOR NEW RESIDENTS OF BOTH PROPOSED SITES. Each home will probably have multiple cars.  The plans will cause gridlock and furthermore emergency vehicles won’t able to access victims of accidents. The extra traffic for construction will also have only a couple of roads to access the building sites which are through residential areas and will be dangerous for families as well as noisy and will cause traffic chaos. THIS IS A SPECIFIC PROBLEM FOR FRODSHAM STRAIN ON VITAL AMENITIES We do not have vital amenities for hundreds of new residents. The small town - which we call a village - only has one doctors’ surgery and it is already nearly impossible to get an appointment. We have no NHS dentists at all for new people and no secondary schools at all. Helsby High School will not be able to take students from Frodsham as they also have a major new housing development. There are therefore no local secondary school for an influx of children and also a limited number of primary school spaces. WILDLIFE PROTECTION Ancient woodland cover is now only 2.4% in Britain - a fraction of what it once was.  Hob Hey is an ancient wood and site of biodiverse interest which should be protected and not destroyed by new development.  It has a blanket Tree Preservation Order on much of the wooded area and it is a haven to protected species of bats including the rare Nathusius’ pipistrelle. It is also home to barn and tawny owls as well as sparrow hawks, buzzards and kestrels and birds such as the great spotted woodpecker. It is an asset for the community to enjoy and it is used regularly for activities eg. for children and dog walking. Furthermore the Dig Lane fields are a wildlife corridor to the marshes and the famous bird conservation area. WORSE AIR QUALITY AND LIGHT POLLUTION    More building work and housing developments will mean much worse air quality and light pollution in the area. Frodsham is already situated next to the motorway, airport and chemical factories which leave its residents open to much worse health issues than other towns due to poor air quality.  How can this be justified?  FALLING HOUSE PRICES AND LOSS OF COMMUNITY AND GREEN SPACE Frodsham is currently a desirable small countryside town. It has green space which is well used by the community but these large proposed developments on our green belt will adversely impact house prices as well as destroy wildlife communities and rare species. Families need to live in healthy towns with access to good schools, surgeries and other amenities for everyone which we will not have. The town only has one main road into Frodsham from the motorway and out to Helsby then just two main roads out towards Kingsley. One of these roads into Frodsham is via a bridge which raises and  stops traffic if a boat sails along the canal. Therefore any such proposals will mean total gridlock and harmful pollution through residential areas. In conclusion, I believe it would be better to build on brownfield sites rather than these greenfield options. They would be detrimental in the extreme to local residents and wildlife and cause traffic chaos.  Whilst it would be a wonderful world if most residents were able to rely on public transport to get around, the reality means this is not a reality. We live in the countryside and rely mostly on cars rather than bicycles and trains which are both unreliable and unrealistic.  

Comment

Representation ID: 12242

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Jeffrey Tyghe

I&O_12756
Please include this as an objection to policies SS41,SS42,SS43. I strongly object to houses being built on Hob Hey Wood. We should protect our green belt. I also oppose the amount of extra traffic this will incur passing our house.

Comment

Representation ID: 12302

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Richard Smith

I&O_12816
I am objecting to the policy's SS41, SS42, SS43, it a total disgrace that you want to rip up ancient woodlands. Traffic in Frodsham is at a standstill when the M56 is blocked. The infrastructure for a small town does not work.

Comment

Representation ID: 12309

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Stephen Woodcock

I&O_12823
I have recently been informed of your potential planning policies - specifically SS41, SS42 and SS43. As a local resident I am writing to inform you that I object to these policies. My objection is based upon, but no limited to the following points:- Increased Flood Risk More Gridlock on Frodsham Roads - The roads are already heavily congested as it is and in a really poor state. Further traffic would be even more detrimental to the roads. Strain on GPs, Dentists, and Schools - It is extremely hard work getting a doctors appointment as it stands. Schools are relatively full too. Destruction of Wildlife Corridors Damage to Ancient Woodland Worse Air Quality & Light Pollution Falling House Prices Loss of Community and Green Space I have been advised to email yourselves regarding this objection.

Comment

Representation ID: 12315

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Colin Dempsey

FRO01
I&O_12829
I have read the associated material relating to national guidelines and local considerations, including eco- and environmental issues, infrastructural impacts etc. However, I would suggest that there is a danger that some significant local issues might be overlooked.  Although the area under consideration would appear to be suitable in many ways for residential development, and although it ticks many of the boxes in the planning policies documents, there are issues that seem not to have been thought through. To ignore these would inevitably reduce the amenity for existing residents of Frodsham, and for residents of other local communities, as well as residents of the new developments. Everyone would be disadvantaged.  This particular site presents challenges of accessibility. Although it is close to Frodsham and to Frodsham’s transport connections (train station, motorway junction) those connections can only be accessed using already constrained and over-burdened roads through a housing estate that was built sixty years ago.  The access options facing residents of the newly-built houses on this development would be:  To use (presumably newly-upgraded) Townfield Lane linking to Langdale Way linking to B5152 Fluin Lane.     To turn left along Townfield Lane, joining the B5152  between its junctions with Church Road and Red Lane.     Langdale Way is an estate service road built 60 years ago to handle traffic into and out of the Lakes Estate. It is already overloaded, especially by the school-run traffic at Manor House School, compounded by associated parking problems at relevant times. There is another pinch-point where the shops at the lower end of Langdale Way carry their own parking problems.     Langdale Way is a steep road. In winter weather, traction can be difficult for cars; vehicles are sometimes abandoned and drivers need to find alternative ways to reach the top. The new development would suffer from this problem.   Langdale Way feeds into B5152 at Fluin Lane,  some 100 meters up from its junction with the A56(T). Exiting from Langdale Way involves a double drip-feed as there is invariably a stationery queue in one direction and a steady stream approaching from the other. This challenge is compounded by the bend in the lower end of Fluin Lane making approaching traffic from the right unseen.    Looking at the second option, there is a significant pinch-point where residential on-street parking reduces Townfield Lane to alternate one-way traffic for a 100 meter section. The remainder of that road is only the width of an estate road, with regular parking issues.     The junction with the B5152 is a classic example of complexity for emerging drivers. There is unseen traffic to the left due to a bend; there is traffic emerging from Church Road; traffic from the right is a merged stream, partly direct from the village and partly from Fluin Lane, and the whole thing is topped-off when vehicles from this stream are waiting to turn right into Church Road. When the residents of a new development are added into this mix, the results for everyone are hardly likely to be  relaxing.    It is difficult to see a simple solution to these pre-existing bottle-necks. They already represent a daily problem for residents, and that can only be exacerbated by the addition of new homes whose access to the rest of the World is limited to these same corridors. The aforementioned school-run issue is certain to be worsened by an increased population.  An associated ‘local’ challenge is that the A56 through the village serves as a pressure-relief valve for the M56, especially when there is an incident or accident either east- or west-bound. A glance at the records via Inrix  would show that there is an ‘incident’ almost every Friday, usually in an afternoon. Incidents also occur at other times. At such times, local users are well advised to stay home or stay away, since they are unlikely to make any progress on the main road or on any connected road, as self-diverted motorway traffic inches slowly through the village. A fender-bender on the M56 can lead directly to queues on Langdale way and at the western end of Townfield Lane.  This problem in turn is exacerbated by the absence of a Junction 13 on the M56. Traffic heading west for Helsby has to pass through Frodsham or has to go as far as J14 and then return. The reverse situation arises for eastbound motorway traffic heading for Frodsham.  The planning policies make aspirational reference to sustainable transport developments, and seek to encourage use of alternative transport, specifically walking and cycling. However, a realistic assessment of these options needs to acknowledge that Frodsham is hilly. I live on or about the 60m contour line; the centre of the village is about 9m above sea level. What might be a nice idea in Kings Lynn, Norfolk or in Amsterdam, Holland cannot just be cut-and-pasted into an entirely different geography. One has to assume that residents of the proposed development will not want to walk from the shops with their children and shopping. Nor will e-bikes readily be available to them. They will need to use cars. They will join traffic queues. They will need to park at the shops.   It is my view that new developments, be they for housing or for commercial use, need to be conceived in context with their accessibility to the local area. The proposal at Dig Lane, for example, if it is afforded direct access to the A56 (via traffic lights or a roundabout) would pose much less of a problem than trying to treat a Hob Hey Wood estate like an extension to the Lakes estate. 

Comment

Representation ID: 12329

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Rita Henty

FRO01 and FRO02
I&O_12843
I wish to register a strong objection against the proposed plans for building on the green belt land next to Hob Hey Wood. There are several reasons for my opposition: 1) Whenever there is a problem on the M56, which is frequent, the roads around the Lakes estate rapidly become gridlocked, and to add more traffic to this area would have unthinkable consequences. 2) The added population to the area would put a greater strain on the doctors’ surgery causing longer delays in getting appointments. 3)Frodsham no longer has a secondary school and the children from the area attend Helsby High School. The increase in pupil numbers the school will experience when the large estate in Helsby is completed will already compromise the places at Helsby for children  in Frodsham. This could result in Frodsham children having to travel over to Runcorn, Chester or Northwich to study. Not only would this mean extra travel time and cost for students, but this would inevitably cause the prices of already existing houses in the area to fall. 4)The area in question is much loved and well used by local people, myself included, who enjoy the ancient woodland and the wildlife corridors. Building in this area would destroy the wildlife corridors and damage the ancient woodland. In my opinion the granting of planning permission for this area would be a highly irrational and regrettable mistake

Comment

Representation ID: 12338

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Amy Noble-Smith

I&O_12852
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: 12347

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Jane Holt

I&O_12863
I am answering to object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43 in the consultation document. My choice is to retain the Green Belt.