Comment

Representation ID: 13224

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Alan O'Vaughan

I&O_13743
We have looked in as much detail as we can at the on-line document but felt that – perhaps necessarily – it was very long and detailed, and many of the questions were such that we did not have knowledge or expertise to comment on, so decided to email our views instead. We trust this will be given as much consideration as completing the questionnaire. As Frodsham residents we will concentrate our observations and views around proposals affecting this area.   The FR001, FR002, FR003 housing proposals conflict with the Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan which has been agreed (‘made’) after consultation and a vote by local residents. FR001, FR002, FR003 housing proposals would involve building on Green Belt when other options have been shown as available. Therefore, other options should be prioritised. Road access. Frodsham has limited road access (A56, B5152) and is also bordered by M56 and River Weaver (swing bridge) which along with local terrain (Frodsham Hill) would clearly limit any additional road infrastructure. Being a market town, Frodsham provides essential services (health, leisure, shopping etc) to the many villages/hamlets in the surrounding countryside who require regular access and rely on the road network. Frodsham’s residents need to be able to reliably leave the town for hospital appointments, work etc. Emergency service vehicles need reliable access, both to/from the town and enroute (Runcorn has the nearest ambulance station). The current road network is constantly under stress with the centre of Frodsham acting as a bottleneck. The A56 acts as the only realistic diversion for the regular traffic problems on the M56 resulting in traffic deadlock and chaos in the town. Any significant (as proposed, Option C) increase in housing within the town would lead to even more regular/significant road transport issues.  

Comment

Representation ID: 13243

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Deanna Pine

I&O_13762
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.  As a family we use Hob Hey Wood lots and it would be awful to see it go. Such a beautiful spot that Frodsham is lucky to have.

Comment

Representation ID: 13246

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Gillian Ellison

SS 42
I&O_13765
I strongly object to the above policies regarding the building of any new homes in this area. The traffic is horrendous even now and becomes gridlocked with any M56 problems which occur regularly and Frodsham does not have the infrastructure for such large numbers of new houses to be built.

Comment

Representation ID: 13249

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Brendan Ellison

I&O_13768
Policies SS41, SS42 & SS43 I want to object in the strongest terms to the above policies. Hob Hey Wood and the surrounding area should be left undeveloped and remain as it is for the benefit of the local community.  

Comment

Representation ID: 13255

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Alison Wheeler

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_13774
FRO01, FRO02 Dont Concrete and tarmac our countryside resulting in the destruction of our ancient woodland, orchard and rare species Diminished air quality, light and noise pollution, contamination Destruction of wildlife corridors  Loss of woodlands and fields to walk, and that are a natural habitat to wildlife   Dont build more homes in this area resulting in  More cars on our roads, more potholes, congestion and danger even longer delays to see a GP or dentist Local children struggling to get school places

Comment

Representation ID: 13258

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Jim Thomas

SS 42
I&O_13777
I object to planning policies SS41,SS42 and SS43.

Comment

Representation ID: 13273

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Richard Nield

SS 42
I&O_13792
I am writing to formally object to the proposed housing developments identified as FRO001 and FRO002 in Frodsham. These sites are in close proximity to my home, and I strongly believe they are unsuitable for new-build housing. The proposed areas border a beautiful and ecologically rich woodland that is home to a wide variety of wildlife. Developing on or near this land would be environmentally catastrophic and deeply damaging to the character of our town. My key concerns include: Destruction of Ancient Woodland : The area includes long-established woodland that plays a vital role in local biodiversity and carbon absorption. Threat to Rare Species : The habitat supports species that are increasingly rare and vulnerable to disruption. Air Quality : Increased traffic and construction activity will negatively impact local air quality. Light and Noise Pollution : The tranquillity of the area will be compromised, affecting both wildlife and residents. Waterway Contamination : Natural streams and watercourses running through the woodland are at risk of pollution from construction and urban runoff. Loss of Wildlife Corridors : Development would fragment habitats and impede the movement of animals across the landscape. Loss of Natural Walkways and Scenery : The area is cherished by residents for walking, recreation, and mental wellbeing. Inadequate Road Infrastructure : Local roads are already under pressure, and additional traffic would make commuting and daily life increasingly difficult. Strained Public Services : Local GP surgeries and schools are already at capacity and cannot accommodate a significant increase in population. Impact on House Prices : Overdevelopment may destabilize the local housing market and affect property values.

Comment

Representation ID: 13275

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Keeley Barton

I&O_13794
I am writing to object to the development planned on land that is currently for sale close to Hob Hey Wood in Frodsham. I am objecting to policies SS41, SS42, SS43. Building houses or other buildings close to an historic wood is not acceptable and would be a permanent loss of community and green space while destroying wildlife habitats and thus would cause irreparable damage to ancient woodland. It would increase the risk of flooding in the area while also causing a lowering of air quality and more light pollution. In addition to the catastrophic envronmental damage additional housing would cause more issues with traffic in an area which is often gridlocked. Langdale Way and Fluin Lane would become even busier. House prices locally would be negatively affected and there would be additional strain on local services including GPs, dentists and local primary and Secondary Schools. For these reasons any planning application to build houses on the land should NOT be granted.

Comment

Representation ID: 13280

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Jennifer and Graham Burgess

I&O_13799
We would like to officially object to planning being sought to building houses on land surrounding / adjacent to Hob Hey Wood in Frodsham. I undertstand I need to refer to SS41, SS42 and SS43 in the planning document. A reference to 500 new houses has been mentioned but we would appreciate it if you could send us any documentation you have on this subject. I was born in Ellis Lane, Frodsham and want the green belt kept for all time as a recreation for people and wildlife to enjoy and it must be protected. Very concerned local residents with eight grandchildren.

Comment

Representation ID: 13283

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Graham Burgess

I&O_13802
We would like to officially object to planning being sought to building houses on land surrounding / adjacent to Hob Hey Wood in Frodsham. I undertstand I need to refer to SS41, SS42 and SS43 in the planning document. A reference to 500 new houses has been mentioned but we would appreciate it if you could send us any documentation you have on this subject. I was born in Ellis Lane, Frodsham and want the green belt kept for all time as a recreation for people and wildlife to enjoy and it must be protected. Very concerned local residents with eight grandchildren.

Comment

Representation ID: 13286

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Susanne Daly

I&O_13805
I firmly object to building on areas outlined as FR001, FR002 and FR003 - POLICIES SS41, SS42, SS43 FR001, FR002 these are two areas of Greenbelt land that border Hob Hey Wood and form part of Frodsham’s only remaining rural buffer. I think the idea of building here is poor planning due to flood risk, overloaded roads, extra strains on already stretched local services, destroys wildlife routes, and rips up national policy. If approved, it will damage the town and everyone in it. FR003 has also historical importance and the impact of all the extra traffic particularly on that stretch of road will be a nightmare, Access is terrible. You only had to look at the disruption of nearly 12 months whilst the cycle lane was put in near to Helsby High School. A 10 minute journey took over an hour! Traffic  The A56 and main roads through Frodsham are regularly gridlocked ALREADY!  When the M56 is closed or partially shut, all diverted traffic comes through the town. The Weaver Viaduct carries over 112,000 vehicles daily. That number spikes during roadworks, collisions, or closures -  It's already happening. It quite often takes over an hour to go from Runcorn to Frodsham or Helsby to Frodsham - what should take 10 mins! Add hundreds of extra vehicles from FR001, FR002 and FR003 and the problem gets worse. Emergency vehicles cannot get through. Any development will slow response times even more, putting lives at risk. Source: Hansard (UK Parliament), 2015 – https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2015-11-17/debates/15111754000002/M56(Junctions12To14) 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 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 Hob Hey is relatively secluded. Building hundreds of houses nearby could lead to significant disturbance of the woodland and its wildlife.  Flood Risk is Not a Hypothetical Surface water flooding is the biggest threat to homes in England today. In Frodsham, these 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 GP Practices and Schools Are Full There is no spare capacity in Frodsham’s infrastructure. GP practices are running at limit - we cannot get doctors appointments as it is and are frequently told to "Go to the walk in" at Halton hospital  Schools are close to capacity! No part of this development includes concrete plans or funding for new public services.  Source: Cheshire West Monitoring Reports – https://www.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/residents/planning-and-building-control/local-plan/authority-monitoring-report Air Quality and Light Pollution Will Get Worse Frodsham is already inside an Air Quality Management Area. Cars are the top local pollutant. FR001, FR002 and FR003 would bring more cars, more exhaust, and more noise into a space that’s supposed to be protected. Light pollution has a detrimental effect on bats. There are seven species present in Hob Hey Wood including rare Nathusius’ pipistrelle. Moths are also affected by light pollution. Source: Cheshire West AQMA Action Plan – https://www.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/documents/pests-pollution-food-safety/pollution-and-air-quality/air-quality-review-and-assessment/action-plans/action-plan-frodsham-0118.pdf Source: Bat Conservation Trust Guidance NoteGN08/23Bats and Artificial Lighting At Night. Source: Impact of light pollution on moth morphology–A 137-year study in Germany https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2021.05.004 ). House Prices Will be affected People buy in Frodsham for access to open countryside, peace, and green views. Strip those away, and the value drops. This development removes the very features that give existing homes their worth. Homeowners who’ve invested in the area will be hit with lower resale values and a loss of the rural edge they were sold on. Developers walk away with profit. Residents are left picking up the cost. Greenbelt  Greenbelt is there for a reason. Once you breach it, you set precedent for more erosion. This is not just about FRO01, FRO02 and FR003 It’s about what follows next if this goes ahead. National guidance is clear: development on Greenbelt land must be avoided unless there are absolutely no alternatives. In this case, there are alternatives. This land should remain untouched. Source: GOV.UK Greenbelt Guidance – ttps://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-planning-policy-framework/13-protecting-green-belt-land This proposal is bad planning. 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. Commercial units There are empty commercial units all around the locals areas - Astmoor, Manor Park, Preston Brook in Runcorn, lots in Widnes - it seems absolutley ridiculous to build more when so many have been empty for years? Where should you build? The land  south of Lady Heyes would be more preferable as the traffic issue and access would not be as bad.  There are also plenty of sites such as the land behind Gleaves Garden Centre - Mill Lane which could fit a large number of houses on and access would be slightly better its the approach into Frodsham. I really hope you take into account the views of the people who actually live in Frodsham as we are the ones who will be impacted by this - none in a positive way!

Comment

Representation ID: 13302

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Keith and Bev Darlington

I&O_13821
we use Hob Hey Woods lots and it would be awful to see it go Such a a lovely spot that Frodsham is lucky to have

Comment

Representation ID: 13313

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Dave Wynne

I&O_13832
I am writing to protest against the plans for Frodsham, both the one on land adjacent to Hobby Wood and Townfield Lane and the one between the Netherton Bridge and Netherton Hall pub. My family have lived in Frodsham since the 1700s. Firstly the consultation on the planning portal is complex and unfair, hence the email. I’m no IT slouch but I found it impossible to air my views; hardly fair and transparent. Neither plan should go ahead for the following reasons: Neither plot is poor agricultural land. Both have grown a variety of crops down the years from spuds to corn and barley; grazing for cattle. In my opinion they have been artificially devalued to fit the desires of the landowners for quick profit. Can this not be probed more closely as a cursory enquiry would reveal the claim to be false. The Townfield Lane site is a wildlife corridor to Hobby Wood which is an ancient woodland. Nearby has been recently planted to form part of the Mersey Forest. The wood is home to bats and numerous other species, some rare and nationally significant. Across the site is the ancient packhorse route to Northwich, scene of a Civil War skirmish in which several were killed and numerous ponds. There are also two streams with Mesolithic remains found. The skyline would be detrimentally altered and it affords one of the finest views in this part of Cheshire across the Weaver Valley. Locals still know the fields by their ancient names: Big Tysons Field, Monks, Second Monks, Stone Croft etc. The site at Netherton holds the remains of the earthworks to Frodsham Castle. Dig Lane is thought to be a corruption of Ditch lane and is cited by Rachel Swallow in her report on the castle at Frodsham. Castle Park entrance is the scene of nearly daily near misses as cars attempt to enter the busy A56. It is not credible to put another junction here. The view across to Liverpool, admittedly partially already blighted by wind turbines would be further degraded. The A56 is gridlocked whenever the M56 is blocked and the schools are fully subscribed. I try to get doctors appointments and you get a date in the following month several weeks into the future. Frodsham simply doesn’t have the infrastructure to cope with many hundreds more families. People move here to have a bustling vibrant town with countryside on their doorstep. Interestingly my father attempted to build 3 bungalows on his small plot of land down at Frodsham Bridgein the 1960s. This was roundly rejected as it would invade the buffer zone between Frodsham and Runcorn to form a continuous conurbation. In summary, neither of these developments should go ahead. It is like you have given a schoolchild a map and said where should you expand these towns and they’ve gone for the two obvious missing shapes in the built up area with no idea of the detrimental impact on wildlife, historical remains or visual amenity. I categorically reject this ill thought out proposal in the strongest terms.

Comment

Representation ID: 13317

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Aimee Bebbington

I&O_13836
SS42- Do not build on FRO01 and FRO02

Comment

Representation ID: 13320

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Emma Chaplin

I&O_13839
No to FRO01 and FRO02 - objection for Hob Hey Woods development I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. My family use Hob Hey Wood a lot and it would be awful to see it go. Such a beautiful spot that Frodsham is lucky to have.  

Comment

Representation ID: 13325

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Ian Ferguson

I&O_13844
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43

Comment

Representation ID: 13363

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Stacey Townley

SS 42
I&O_13882
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. As a family we regularly visit Hob Hey Wood and strongly object the removal of this important and locally treasured green area. I also don’t feel adequate assurance has been made to the impact to local services such as doctors, schooling and infrastructure like our local roads.

Comment

Representation ID: 13368

Received: 31/08/2025

Respondent: Jonathan Yarker

I&O_13887
I wish to object to the development plans for Hob Hey wood (SS41, SS42 and SS43). I am aware there is a need for more housing and infrastructure in the UK but this cannot be done in such a beautiful and biodiversity rich land such as Hob Hey Wood. This would destroy habitats for many mammals, birds and insects, as well as seriously exacerbate flood risk. My family and I love visiting the woods, as do many other families, and it would be a heartbreaking shame if you just did away with this beautiful land.

Comment

Representation ID: 13372

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Richard Barker

I&O_13891
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.   My family and friends enjoy Hob Hey Wood regularly and it would be unforgivable to allow the destruction of this wonderful woodland area that has been a part of the natural Frodsham landscape for generations. As the last remaining bit of ancient woodland in the area which supports native species of plants, animals and insects specific to ancient woodland, it is beyond belief that this is being considered for building and must not be allowed. We must stop building on our green areas and greenbelt.  My neighbours are many of the 80 tenants in the allotment site also being considered. They have, as a young family, poured blood sweat and tears into cultivating this land over the past 5 years and are finally seeing the literal fruits of their labours. Their children are growing up enjoying this site and learning about nature, and it is vital to their continued development and education. The local community feels that our green spaces are essential to making this village unique and special and coupled with the current overwhelmed infrastructure consisting of schools at capacity, doctors with no availability for new patients and roads at saturation points, which has caused irreparable damage to their surfaces and are not being satisfactorily maintained, this proposal must not be allowed to continue .  We, a community as a whole, do not want or support these plans and insist that our voices are heard. 

Comment

Representation ID: 13411

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Stuart Townley

I&O_13930
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. As a family we regularly visit Hob Hey Wood and strongly object the removal of this important and locally treasured green area. I also don’t feel adequate assurance has been made to the impact to local services such as doctors, schooling and infrastructure like our local roads.

Comment

Representation ID: 13424

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Kimberley Gould

I&O_13943
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. As a family we use Hob Hey Wood lots and it would be awful to see it go. Such a beautiful spot that Frodsham is lucky to have.  

Comment

Representation ID: 13429

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Lucy Mckeown

I&O_13948
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.  As a family we use Hob Hey Wood lots and it would be awful to see it go. Such a beautiful spot that Frodsham is lucky to have.

Comment

Representation ID: 13434

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Jess Wharton

I&O_13953
I object to policy SS42.   As a family we regularly visit Hob Hey Wood and strongly object the removal of this important and locally treasured green area. I also don’t feel adequate assurance has been made to the impact to local services such as doctors, schooling and infrastructure like our local roads.  

Comment

Representation ID: 13439

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Iryna Garkusha

I&O_13958
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. My family with 2 children use Hob Hey Wood lots and it would be awful to see it go. Such a beautiful spot that Frodsham is lucky to have.

Comment

Representation ID: 13444

Received: 30/08/2025

Respondent: Maya Bell

I&O_13963
I am writing to object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. My family and I often walk round these woods and have done for the past decade. They are a peaceful place filled with wildlife and hidden trails and I do not think developers should be allowed to build here. Frodsham already lacks woods and to ruin this place would be a shame for the whole community.  I am 20 years old but I enjoy these woods and would not want them to be ruined. 

Comment

Representation ID: 13454

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Phillip Prescott

I&O_13973
I am objecting to policy SS42.   I am a Frodsham resident and have lived here for over 25 years. I value the benefits of our small town, belonging to a 'village' community, the small local schools and the access to surrounding countryside.  I believe that many other residents have remained here or moved here for similar reasons.  Over the years, new residential developments have been created, but in my opinion we are now approaching saturation point. I believe this proposed development will be detrimental to the local area for many reasons. It will cause destruction, contamination and damage to what I believe to be protected Greenbelt,  to local nature - wildlife, ancient woodlands and rare species.  Frodsham is an area where the local nature and the ability to preserve and enjoy its benefits are highly valued, both by many locals and visitors alike.  The sheer volume of the heavy plant and vehicles required to install the infrastructure required for this kind of development alone is likely to be extremely damaging to a wide area of Frodsham.  Should the development go ahead, once in place, there will be   pollution of air, light and noise quality. The increase in local traffic will also result in further congestion of our roads, which are already suffering from large volumes of traffic on a regular basis, access problems which could be potentially dangerous, and misery for those of us who live in the vicinity.  We risk losing the woodland and fields surrounding the site, which are valued by many for the ability to walk through them and gain the benefits of our local 'outdoors'.   There would be increased pressure on our already severely overloaded health and dental practices, and create the risk of our children losing access to local schools.

Comment

Representation ID: 13460

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Judith Prescott

I&O_13979
I am objecting to policy SS42.   I am a Frodsham resident and have lived here for 65 years. Having moved here as a small child, and grown up here, I specifically chose to bring my own family up in our small town because of the benefits of belonging to a 'village' community, the small local schools and the access to surrounding countryside.  I believe that many other residents have remained here or moved here for similar reasons.  Over the years, new residential developments have been created, but we are now approaching saturation point. In my opinion this proposed development will be detrimental to the local area for many reasons. It will cause destruction, contamination and damage to what I believe to be protected Greenbelt,  to local nature - wildlife, ancient woodlands and rare species.  Frodsham is an area where the local nature and the ability to preserve and enjoy its benefits are highly valued, both by many locals and visitors alike.  The sheer volume of the heavy plant and vehicles required to install the infrastructure required for this kind of development alone is likely to be extremely damaging to a wide area of Frodsham.  Should the development go ahead, once in place, there will be   pollution of air light and noise quality. The increase in local traffic will also result in further congestion of our roads, which are already suffering from large volumes of traffic on a regular basis, access problems which could be potentially dangerous, and misery for those of us who live in the vicinity.  We risk losing the woodland and fields surrounding the site, which are valued by many for the ability to walk through them and gain the benefits of our local 'outdoors'.   There would be increased pressure on our already severely overloaded health and dental practices, and create the risk of our children losing access to local schools.

Comment

Representation ID: 13479

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Rachael Frank

I&O_13998
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.  As a family we use Hob Hey Wood lots and it would be awful to see it go. Such a beautiful spot that Frodsham is lucky to have.

Comment

Representation ID: 13486

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Fiona Dance

I&O_14005
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. As a family we regularly visit Hob Hey Wood and strongly object the removal of this important and locally treasured green area. I also don’t feel adequate assurance has been made to the impact to local services such as doctors, schooling and infrastructure like our local roads

Comment

Representation ID: 13492

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Amy Gregory-Cowx

I&O_14011
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. As a family we regularly visit Hob Hey Wood and strongly object the removal of this important and locally treasured green area. I also don’t feel adequate assurance has been made to the impact to local services such as doctors, schooling and infrastructure like our local roads.