Comment

Representation ID: 13497

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Daniel Gregory

I&O_14016
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: 13503

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Siobhan Pascoe

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_14022
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. The area currently is beautiful and to build on it would be deeply upsetting to the many, many families and local residents who use it, as well as being terrible for the wildlife.  Frodsham is lucky to have such beautiful spots and to lose this area would be a such a shame and so damaging for the community. 

Comment

Representation ID: 13506

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Sue and Ken Smith

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_14025
my wife and l strongly feel that the proposed development of areas FRO 01 and FRO 02 in the proximity of Hob Hey wood would be very detrimental to its flourishment. Hob Hey wood is a much valued asset to Frodsham and yet vulnerable to the modern way of life. It needs as much protection and care as we can offer to ensure it remains a haven for all.

Comment

Representation ID: 13515

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Graham Macleod

I&O_14034
SS41, SS42, SS43 I am objecting to the planning policies above. I feel that green belt farming land should be built upon only as an absolute last resort. I have lived in Thirlmere Close since June 1983 and purchased this property as I had nice, quiet, open aspect, farming land to the rear of the property. This is why I have never moved house. I would like to see all brownfield sites built on first ,such as has happened with the ex BICC site in Helsby before infill land becomes earmarked for development. I am sure there are some sites in Frodsham that can be non green belt which can be developed first. There are traffic problems getting out of Langdale Road onto Fluin lane and Fluin Lane onto High Street/Bridge Street at present and any further increase could cause gridlock at peak times. This would also increase air pollution. Any development towards Hob Hey Wood would endanger wildlife such as badgers and foxes which roam the fields, as well as butterflies, birds and insects which live around this area. I would worry about the loss of dark skies that we currently have over this area and the pollution caused by the additional population.  The doctors and dentists are already at breakingpoint and car parking in the town is increasingly difficult before any new properties are constructed. I hope you take the above into consideration before you decide to build on our valuable green belt land which is irreplaceable and refuse these applications.

Comment

Representation ID: 13521

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Joanne Shaw

I&O_14040
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.

Comment

Representation ID: 13527

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Jay Fraser

I&O_14046
I’m writing to formally register my strong objection to the proposed plans to build a large number of homes on the ancient woodlands at Hob Hey Wood and the land in and around the allotments at the top of Langdale Way in Frodsham. This is with specific reference to SS41, SS42 and SS43. While I fully understand the need for new housing, Frodsham simply doesn’t have the infrastructure, facilities, or capacity to support a development of this size. Traffic and Road Network Concerns This part of Frodsham is served by just one main road and a very narrow secondary road — both of which are already under strain. The traffic caused during construction alone would be problematic, let alone the long-term impact of hundreds of additional vehicles once these homes are occupied. Most households own at least two cars, and often more as children grow up. Frodsham already suffers from daily traffic bottlenecks, which get significantly worse whenever there’s an issue on the M56. When problems occur on the motorway (which is frequent — especially between junctions 10 and 14), the resulting congestion brings Frodsham to a standstill. Having lived in Frodsham for 28 years, I’ve seen this go from being a monthly inconvenience to happening three or four times a week. The swing bridge and Sutton Weaver junction — critical westbound routes into Frodsham — are already operating beyond capacity. Adding potentially 1,300+ more vehicles daily would only worsen an already chaotic situation. Pressure on Local Schools All local primary schools are single-form entry and already full. The closest school to the proposed development, The Manor, would be unable to cope with the additional pupils or the extra traffic during drop-off and pick-up times. Secondary education options are also stretched. Since the closure of Frodsham High School, Helsby High is the only secondary school in the area — and it’s already operating at capacity as it serves Frodsham, Helsby, and surrounding villages. Strain on Healthcare Services Our local GP surgeries and healthcare staff are already overwhelmed. The health centre is under constant pressure, and getting a routine appointment is often difficult. Introducing hundreds more families would only add to this strain, without any clear plan for expanding medical provision. Emergency Services Limitations Frodsham's fire station is now only part-time, and our police presence has been reduced to a community base rather than a full station. These services are already struggling to meet current demands — they cannot handle a significant increase in population. Flood Risk and Failing Water Infrastructure Frodsham's existing waste and fresh water systems are already stretched thin. Sewer capacity is an ongoing concern, and during the wetter months, surface water runoff frequently causes flooding and damage to roads. United Utilities are regularly called out to deal with leaks and burst pipes — a clear sign that the infrastructure is aging and overburdened. Adding a large-scale housing development to this fragile system is asking for trouble. Where will the excess water from construction and paved surfaces go? The area's natural sandstone geology also raises serious concerns about potential environmental damage from such large-scale disruption. Loss of Green Spaces and Irreplaceable Woodland Frodsham is valued for its natural surroundings — not just by residents, but also by visitors and the local farming community. Our green spaces play a vital role in our health, wellbeing, and biodiversity. Destroying ancient woodland and open land would directly impact local wildlife, disrupt natural habitats and corridors, and worsen air and light pollution. These woodlands play a critical role in absorbing emissions and supporting local ecosystems. If we remove them, we not only lose their beauty but also the protection they offer us. With the loss of space to wind and solar farms already underway, we cannot afford to sacrifice more of our natural landscape. Frodsham is a market town that has always maintained a village feel. People choose to live here for its greenery and peaceful surroundings. If they wanted city living, they would move to a city. This proposal threatens the very identity of our town. Financial and Practical Viability Even nearby developments have failed. In Helsby, a brownfield redevelopment site has already been through two failed attempts before any real progress was made — and that was on a site far more suitable for housing than the one being proposed here. Frodsham doesn't have any equivalent brownfield sites, nor does it have the capacity — geographic or geological — to sustain a development of this scale. Forcing such a development into an unsuitable location isn’t just short-sighted — it’s potentially disastrous. In summary, this proposal is unsustainable for Frodsham on almost every level — infrastructure, schooling, healthcare, emergency services, environmental stability, and community wellbeing. I strongly urge you to reconsider this plan and instead focus on more appropriate sites that are better equipped to support new housing. Please confirm receipt of this objection and ensure it is formally recorded against the proposal.

Comment

Representation ID: 13535

Received: 30/08/2025

Respondent: Claire Hough

I&O_14054
We object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43    

Comment

Representation ID: 13564

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Kate Ridley

I&O_14083
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: 13567

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Russell Gates

I&O_14086
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. As the last remaining bit of ancient woodland in the area it is beyond belief that this is being considered for building!  We are also one of the 80 tenants in the allotment site also being considered. We have, as a young family, poured our blood sweat and tears into cultivating this land over the past 5 years and are finally seeing the literal fruits of our labours. My children have grown up in this site, and it is dear to so many of us. As a community our green spaces are what makes this place special. And the current infrastructure of schools, doctors and roads can not support more housing. We as a community do not want or support these plans and I hope that we are listened too. 

Comment

Representation ID: 13575

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Tracy Briscoe-Owens

I&O_14094
Green Belt Protection objections: - The site is within the Green Belt. Development here conflicts with NPPF paragraphs 137–140, which require “exceptional circumstances” to justify Green Belt release. - Green Belt protection is a major material consideration in planning decisions. The area surrounding Hob Hey woods especially needs to be protected at all costs, across the UK we are shrinking our indigenous wildlife habitat beyond reasonable limits. Once this land is gone it cannot be replaced. There has already been wind turbine and now solar panel plans on the local marshes which is on a significant migratory path for birds. Has the impact of yet another habitat loss even been considered? There are protected species in the directly impacted area too (newts, bats) -places for local people to enjoy – Hob Hey is widely used by the local and surrounding community. We see the increasing desecration of local habitat. What a shame to lose such a beautiful source. Traffic & Highway Safety - Frodsham already experiences congestion, especially when M56 incidents occur. Additional housing could worsen this. - Concerns over emergency access and construction vehicle impact. -I live on Church Street, and have done for the last 12 years. I have personally seen a substantial increase in traffic across this period, further increase of the proposed house increase cannot be supported on existing roads. The consultation is very complex to navigate and it's difficult to see what countermeasure have been proposed for this. - we have already seen deaths on manley road due to lack of footpaths, and more traffic to these areas will only worsen risk. Also Howey Lane as a 'cut through' does not have a public pathway. Is there proposals for increasing public footpaths, cycling lanes? We are putting our children and community at risk here. I can't actually see what the proposal entails for 'improvements' to frodsham train station. Is is landlocked so carpark spaces will be a challenge. Plus local residents already experience issues of people parking outside their houses. The recent additional of 'Greggs' bakery to the petrol station on Bridge lane in Frodsham has significantly impacted waiting traffic and jams as peak hours - more houses/cards/people will worsen this. -and on all of the above - potholes cannot be taken care of now safely! What's the proposal to improve road maintenance/associated budgets in portion to the increase volumes? Strain on Infrastructure (GPs, schools, etc.) - Existing public services are overstretched, it is (near impossible) to get a dentist appointment or doctors appointment within a suitable timeframes. What are the proposed countermeasures for this? Again, the consultation document is so complex to navigate and this is not the industry I work in so I cannot see what the proposed counter measure is to this. -likewise, is there a proposal for school place increase. I have 3 children in school age, Frodsham secondary school was closed so the only local secondary school of reasonable walking distance is Helsby high, can both primary and secondary schools support this increase? Also with SEN services, these again are ridiculously stretched not only int eh area but in the country as a whole, what is the proposal to support this proportionately? -as above, the Infrastructure on roads, public transport, is strained. Sewage & Flooding Risks - Historical surface water flooding in Langdale Way; major interventions were needed in the past. - Concerns about impermeable surfaces increasing runoff and pollution. -again as a Church Street resident I have first hand experience of the flood/run off waters that come down when rainfall is high, and my cellar floods. This will only be exacerbated by the proposals. This is a major concern. Harm to Biodiversity and Ancient Woodland (Hob Hey Wood) - Hob Hey is ancient woodland – irreplaceable habitat loss and protected species loss - Development could disrupt wildlife corridors, increase pollution and disturbance (including light and pet intrusion). Contrary to the NPPF's sustainability principles - Claims that the site was chosen purely for proximity to the train station, not its environmental suitability. - Unsustainable development (environmentally or socially) is contrary to core planning principles in the NPPF.

Comment

Representation ID: 13581

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Helen Reddy

I&O_14100
I want to object to policies ss41 ss42 and ss43. this is to protect hob hey wood and our wildlife and to also protect our quality of living.

Comment

Representation ID: 13595

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Miranda Latham

I&O_14114
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: 13598

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Nathaniel Jonescand

I&O_14117
I am extremely concerned and I am writing about SS41, SS42, SS43 proposals for Frodsham housing development. I know having been a recent property buyer in the area the importance of housing stock and accessibility to the housing market. It makes me very angry that people of my age cannot have access to housing in the local area, and even small properties are expensive.    That being said, I am appalled at the proposals outlined above, they clearly have no appreciation for the current infrastructure or residents or the area and show a lack of thought and care for the community of Frodsham. This area is unsuitable for a number of reasons which I have outlined below, I would urge you to consider in particular the impact on current infrastructure in line with planning proposals.    Traffic is Already Broken The A56 and main roads through Frodsham are regularly gridlocked. 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. None of this is future risk. It's already happening. Add hundreds of extra vehicles from FR001 and FR002 and the problem gets worse. Emergency vehicles already struggle to get through. This development will slow response times even more, putting lives at risk. GP Practices and Schools Are Full There is no spare capacity in Frodsham’s infrastructure. GP practices are running at limit. Schools are close to capacity. New homes mean more pressure, more waiting, more stretched services. No part of this development includes concrete plans or funding for new public services. That means the burden falls on existing ones, which are already struggling. 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 and FR002 would bring more cars, more exhaust, and more noise into a space that’s supposed to be protected. Lighting from new housing, cars and street lamps will spill into Hob Hey Wood and rural zones. This ruins habitat for nocturnal species and affects human sleep cycles. 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 ). Antisocial Behaviour and Isolation Will Rise New estates without integrated planning lead to social fragmentation. These areas become disconnected, under-policed, and under-supported. This isn’t speculation. It’s known from other developments nationally. The National Planning Policy Framework requires that growth supports community cohesion. This proposal does not. It isolates new homes on the edge of town and dumps responsibility for cohesion onto already stretched services. Source: NPPF (2023) – https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-planning-policy-framework--2   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: 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: 13603

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Colin Fowler

I&O_14122
Objection to proposed housing rear Ellis lane . Pit field and Hob hey wood Strongly reject this proposal

Comment

Representation ID: 13615

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Frodsham Town Council

I&O_14134
FRO01 - Land adjacent to Hob Hey Wood, off townfield lane and classed as green belt                               has raised many concerns from the community in Frodsham. In addition, the local                 roads with resident parking are already a congested area and building on the land                 would cause further traffic issues. 

Comment

Representation ID: 13617

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Frodsham Town Council

I&O_14136
I largely agree with the suggested policy, however green belt land should only be considered as a last resort and considers the views of residents within Frodsham. Affordable housing  also within the area is a must for the future generations of Frodsham people.

Comment

Representation ID: 13621

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Roger Samson Taylor

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_14140
In the context of Policies SS41–SS43, please record the following objections: Loss of scientific woodland and biodiversity The sites border/contain established, ecologically significant woodland that supports rare and protected species. Development here risks irreversible habitat damage and conflicts with local and national biodiversity priorities. Destruction of community allotments and productive farmland These areas are vital for local food resilience, wellbeing, and heritage. Allotments in particular provide substantial social and mental-health benefits. Their loss would permanently diminish Frodsham’s character and sustainability. Inadequate transport infrastructure Frodsham already experiences gridlock, especially when incidents occur on the M56. Local roads were not designed for further heavy traffic. Without credible mitigation and sustainable transport options, additional housing will worsen congestion, air quality, and safety. Strain on community services Schools, healthcare and community facilities are already under pressure. Absent major, secured investment in supporting infrastructure, the development would be unsustainable. Complaint regarding the site-selection process and competence In addition to my objection, please treat this as a formal complaint under your corporate complaints procedure. The fact that FRO01 and FRO02 have progressed to consideration suggests serious deficiencies in the site-selection methodology, professional judgement and governance applied. I request that the authority: Publishes the full evidence base and scoring that led to FRO01/FRO02 being shortlisted (ecology, flood risk, heritage, landscape, transport modelling, utilities capacity, health/equalities impacts, and deliverability). Provides the site appraisal matrix for FRO01/FRO02, including criteria, weightings, raw scores, and the names/roles of the panels or officers who signed off each stage. Confirms the competence framework used (qualifications, chartered status/registrations such as RTPI or equivalent, relevant experience and CPD) for those who assessed and recommended these sites, and discloses any conflicts of interest considered. Commissions an independent review of the site-selection process for these locations and publishes the findings and any corrective actions. Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (and, where applicable, the Environmental Information Regulations 2004), please disclose and publish an itemised breakdown of all costs incurred in developing and promoting the FRO01/FRO02 proposals (e.g., consultancy fees, surveys/reports, modelling, legal advice, staff time, and external communications), with a response within the statutory 20 working days. To be clear, I am asking for a review of the decision-making process and the competence assurance applied, not making allegations against any individual. However, I expect a transparent explanation of how such environmentally sensitive and infrastructurally constrained sites could have advanced to this stage.

Comment

Representation ID: 13625

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Janine Ellams

I&O_14144
I am objecting to the following policies: SS41 SS42 SS43 This land must be protected at all costs, not only just because of its natural beauty but because of the impact on the list I have set out below: Loss of prime agricultural land, at a time when we should be looking at increasing home grown production to cut down on imports which have a major roll in polluting the environment. Extra strain on our public services, dentist, doctors, and schools. Increased Flood Risk More Gridlock on Frodsham Roads Destruction of Wildlife Corridors Damage to Ancient Woodland Worse Air Quality & Light Pollution Loss of Community and Green Space Please keep your hands off our Greenbelt, it is like we’re going backwards, to a time when the planet wasn’t burning under the weight of fossil fuels and a consumer over consumption capitalist economy, so much damage has already been done, time to rethink how we use the spaces we haven’t already destroyed which ultimately gives a few people a short term profit and leaves the rest of us to live with the mess. We must protect our environments especially those which have escaped destruction over past decades.

Comment

Representation ID: 13631

Received: 28/08/2025

Respondent: Colin Worrall

I&O_14150
i wish to register my objection to the policies above these sites are totally unsuitable for housing for many reasons 1 damage to ancient woodlands hobey wood in particular ,hundreds of species of birds animals butterflies insects bats to many to list . 2 destruction of hedgerows again natural habitat for wildlife 3 lossof community and green space4 drainage sewerage in particular sewerage from lansdowne springbourne estates pumped up bradley lane ,when this system fails as it periodically does raw sewage ends up in the river weaver , this proposed policy might need a similar  system on the land behind fairways and bradley lane due to the slopes of field again this pumped system would have to be maintainedby cheshire west  5gridlock on roads  6 more strain on medical services and schools  6 worse air and light pollution 7 falling property prices . while i understand the need for more housing especially affordable housing .the a56 corridor to helsby is more suitable level fields acsesssto main road and services affordable houses would slot in better. sites proposed developers wouldnot include affordable houses due to the high cost developing polices ss41 2 3 

Comment

Representation ID: 13642

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Frodsham Town Council

FRO01, FRO02, FRO03
I&O_14161
Do not build on fro01, or Fro02 . These sites are simply not suitable for housing and would harm Frodshams infrastructure, and massively harm biodiversity in the area.   Fro03 by comparrison is a crappy old field that is actually next to a main road. Rebuilding that part of Frodsham can only be an improvement

Comment

Representation ID: 13650

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Donna Rhodes

I&O_14169
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.  As a family we use Hob Hey Wood for many of years and still do, it would be awful to see it go. Such a beautiful spot that Frodsham is lucky to have.

Comment

Representation ID: 13658

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Amy and Dan Evans

I&O_14177
formally object to the proposed development of sites FRO01 ("Frodsham East") and FRO02 ("Frodsham South") as identified in the "Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)" document. My objection is based on a number of serious and legally valid material planning considerations, which I believe are not adequately addressed by the current proposals.   The proposal to release these Green Belt sites is contrary to the overarching principles of sustainable development and the specific policies of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan.   Green Belt Protection and Failure to Demonstrate Exceptional Circumstances The proposed sites, FRO01 and FRO02, are designated Green Belt land. According to NPPF paragraphs 137–140, development within the Green Belt is considered "inappropriate" unless "very special circumstances" or "exceptional circumstances" are proven to exist. The Local Plan document fails to provide any clear, evidenced justification that these sites are the only viable option. It presents no evidence that brownfield sites or less sensitive land were seriously considered first. The release of Green Belt land must be a last resort. The claim that the sites were chosen simply due to proximity to the train station, rather than their environmental suitability, is a direct contradiction of NPPF sustainability principles. Therefore, I argue that sites FRO01 and FRO02 are entirely unsuitable for development and must be removed from consideration.   Major Infrastructure Strain (Relating to SS43) The proposed development would place an unacceptable strain on Frodsham's existing and already fragile infrastructure. The document acknowledges that "traffic congestion can be an issue in the town centre and on connecting roads" (page 120). A significant increase in population from an estimated 1,300+ homes across FRO01 and FRO02 would inevitably lead to gridlock on local roads, particularly the A56, with no guaranteed infrastructure improvements to mitigate this impact. This would also compromise emergency access. Furthermore, local GP practices and schools are already operating at or near full capacity. The plan fails to provide concrete proposals for the delivery of new, essential infrastructure to support this scale of development, which is a key requirement of the council's own policies.   Sewage, Flooding Risks, and New Drainage Standards The proposed sites are part of Frodsham’s natural water absorption zone. Removing this permeable land will significantly increase surface water runoff and flood risk, not only on the development sites themselves but also for neighbouring communities. There is historical evidence of surface water flooding and sewage issues in areas such as Langdale Way, which required major interventions in the past. The proposal to build here directly contradicts the council’s flood risk strategy, which aims to "avoid, where possible, flood risk to people and property" and to "minimise the risk of flooding from all sources" (FW 1, page 197). This also conflicts with the new government guidance on Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) published in June 2025, which mandates a strict hierarchy for rainwater management, protection against extreme rainfall, and water quality protection. The development cannot credibly meet these new standards without causing harm to the wider area.   Environmental Sensitivity and Harm to Hob Hey Wood The proposed sites border or directly impact Hob Hey Wood, which is a designated Site of Biological Importance and a precious fragment of ancient woodland. The Local Plan document’s own policy approach states that development "must... not result in any net loss of natural assets and deliver a net gain" (GI 1, page 207). Developing on these areas would destroy vital wildlife corridors and buffer zones, causing irreversible harm to this sensitive ecosystem. The document lacks the necessary comprehensive environmental and ecological assessments to justify the potential damage. This proposal is in direct conflict with the council's own policies on Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity.   Community Impact, Wellbeing and Existing Facilities The loss of green spaces for development would have a detrimental effect on the health and wellbeing of Frodsham’s residents. These sites are valued by the community for walking, mental health, and recreation, and they are integral to the local identity. The proposal contradicts the NPPF’s aim to "promote healthy and inclusive communities" by taking away these vital green spaces without adequate replacement. The plan also fails to consider the impact on Frodsham's existing community infrastructure, as the development of land near these sites would threaten the Frodsham Sea Scouts building on Greenfield Lane. This facility is a vital community asset that provides a crucial service for hundreds of young people.   Policy Breach and Final Position The Frodsham Neighbourhood Plan remains a vital part of local planning policy and continues to carry legal weight. This plan reflects community priorities for protecting green spaces, managing traffic, and ensuring housing meets local needs. The proposals for sites FRO01 and FRO02 are in direct conflict with both the spirit and specific policies of this plan.   I strongly and unequivocally object to any development on Green Belt sites FRO01 and FRO02. The proposal conflicts with both national and local policies concerning Green Belt protection, sustainable development, environmental preservation, and community wellbeing. Granting permission for these sites would set a dangerous precedent, opening the door for the continued erosion of Frodsham's Green Belt. I respectfully demand that these sites be fully removed from the Local Plan Review. The council must uphold its statutory duty to protect Green Belt land and only consider truly justified alternatives, which is not the case here.   I also wish to make it clear that the same principles of Green Belt protection, environmental sensitivity, and infrastructure strain apply to other Green Belt areas proposed for development in the consultation, such as those mentioned in Questions SS45 (Helsby) and SS47 (Kelsall).

Comment

Representation ID: 13665

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Faith Howley

I&O_14184
I am objecting to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43. I am a Frodsham resident. Having grown up here with my family, I moved away for a few years for University and my work, but chose to return to 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: 13668

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Stephanie Parker

I&O_14187
Question SS 42 Do you have any further comments about any of the potential growth areas identified around Frodsham? 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:  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: 13688

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Jennifer Burgess

I&O_14208
I would like to object to policies: SS41, SS42 and SS43 Yours faithfully

Comment

Representation ID: 13690

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Andrea Critchley

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_14210
Yes. Do not build on FRO01 and FRO02. These are 2 sections of greenbelt land are border Hob Hey Wood ( increasingly rare ancient woodland home to thousands of species) and provide a rural buffer, which decrease flood risks and provide a wildlife corridor I am sure that you will have had a detailed breakdown as to why wildlife corridors, significant disturbance to the woodland and the flood risk concerns should be taken seriously

Comment

Representation ID: 13693

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Andrew Henderson

I&O_14213
I object to policies SS41, SS42 and SS43.  As a family we use Hob Hey Woods frequently, and it's a great place for children to explore in a forest school type setting. In addition the reduction in green areas would have a detrimental impact on biodiversity, social health and wellbeing and the a reduction in Frodsham's CO2 absorbing abilities.

Comment

Representation ID: 13696

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Colin Parker

I&O_14216
Question SS 42 Do you have any further comments about any of the potential growth areas identified around Frodsham? 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:  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: 13698

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Ian Lancaster

I&O_14218
With regard to the consultation on development of green belt land adjacent to Hob Hey Wood, I raise the following objections: Hob Hey wood is an ancient woodland, predominantly broadleaf deciduous and home to a number of endangered species.  It offers a unique habitat and any development in the area immediately adjacent to it would be detrimental to both the woodland and its resident species. Development and the building of houses on this land would significantly increase traffic in the vicinity of Townfield Lane, Langdale Way, Fluin Lane and associated routes.  Frodsham is repeatedly gridlocked in the event of any disruption on the nearby M56 and further development would only worsen this.  Additionally, the traffic around Manor House School (Langdale Way) during the school run is already at capacity. There is insufficient infrastructure in Frodsham to accommodate any significant development.  Dentists, GP surgeries and other facilities are already full to capacity.  Unless there is significant associated investment in these vital resources to accommodate the increase in housing the development is unsustainable. Flood risk. Langdale Way has a recent history of flooding. Increasing the strain on drainage infrastructure will simply ensure a return to the recent flooding problems.

Comment

Representation ID: 13699

Received: 29/08/2025

Respondent: Andrew Stratton

FRO01, FRO02
I&O_14219
I would like to register my concern regarding the consultation of the land which is being labelled FRO01 & FRO002. This area has greenbelt status and therefore has been identified as being of significant importance to the local wildlife. The green space in the consultation is vital to the wellbeing of the local community & is used daily by the local population.  To poor concrete over the green fields & destroy the ancient woodlands around Hob Hey woods would be a travesty. I would like to register my concern regarding the consultation of the land which is being labelled FRO01 & FRO002. This area has greenbelt status and therefore has been identified as being of significant importance to the local wildlife. The green space in the consultation is vital to the wellbeing of the local community & is used daily by the local population.  To poor concrete over the green fields & destroy the ancient woodlands around Hob Hey woods would be a travesty. I would like to register my concern regarding the consultation of the land which is being labelled FRO01 & FRO002. This area has greenbelt status and therefore has been identified as being of significant importance to the local wildlife. The green space in the consultation is vital to the wellbeing of the local community & is used daily by the local population.  To poor concrete over the green fields & destroy the ancient woodlands around Hob Hey woods would be a travesty. I would like to register my concern regarding the consultation of the land which is being labelled FRO01 & FRO002. This area has greenbelt status and therefore has been identified as being of significant importance to the local wildlife. The green space in the consultation is vital to the wellbeing of the local community & is used daily by the local population.  To poor concrete over the green fields & destroy the ancient woodlands around Hob Hey woods would be a travesty. I would like to register my concern regarding the consultation of the land which is being labelled FRO01 & FRO002. This area has greenbelt status and therefore has been identified as being of significant importance to the local wildlife. The green space in the consultation is vital to the wellbeing of the local community & is used daily by the local population.  To poor concrete over the green fields & destroy the ancient woodlands around Hob Hey woods would be a travesty. I would like to register my concern regarding the consultation of the land which is being labelled FRO01 & FRO002. This area has greenbelt status and therefore has been identified as being of significant importance to the local wildlife. The green space in the consultation is vital to the wellbeing of the local community & is used daily by the local population.  To poor concrete over the green fields & destroy the ancient woodlands around Hob Hey woods would be a travesty. I would like to register my concern regarding the consultation of the land which is being labelled FRO01 & FRO002. This area has greenbelt status and therefore has been identified as being of significant importance to the local wildlife. The green space in the consultation is vital to the wellbeing of the local community & is used daily by the local population.  To poor concrete over the green fields & destroy the ancient woodlands around Hob Hey woods would be a travesty. I would like to register my concern regarding the consultation of the land which is being labelled FRO01 & FRO002. This area has greenbelt status and therefore has been identified as being of significant importance to the local wildlife. The green space in the consultation is vital to the wellbeing of the local community & is used daily by the local population.  To poor concrete over the green fields & destroy the ancient woodlands around Hob Hey woods would be a travesty.