Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 7863

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8352
CH01 is the best and most logical fit for the future growth of Chester CH03 is constrained by floodrisk and biodiversity to its eastern half and by acoustic impacts and highway impact issues CH04 is a poor strategic option and suffers from poor connectivity/accessibility onto the network


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7865

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8354
CH01 is the best and most logical fit for the future growth of Chester CH03 is constrained by floodrisk and biodiversity to its eastern half and by acoustic impacts and highway impact issues CH04 is a poor strategic option and suffers from poor connectivity/accessibility onto the network


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7866

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8355
CH01 is the best and most logical fit for the future growth of Chester CH03 is constrained by floodrisk and biodiversity to its eastern half and by acoustic impacts and highway impact issues CH04 is a poor strategic option and suffers from poor connectivity/accessibility onto the network


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7869

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8358
EP01 (the westernmost parcels) appear to be the best option and fit for strategic growth, benefitting from dual frontages onto both the A5117 and A41, acknowledging there are floodrisk constraints further to the east and the whole area will have to address utility infrastructure  EP02 is constrained by access consideration onto the A5117 without major remodelling  EP03 could offer potential but would reduce the strategic gap between Ellesmere Port and Eastham


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7870

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8359
EP01 (the westernmost parcels) appear to be the best option and fit for strategic growth, benefitting from dual frontages onto both the A5117 and A41, acknowledging there are floodrisk constraints further to the east and the whole area will have to address utility infrastructure  EP02 is constrained by access consideration onto the A5117 without major remodelling  EP03 could offer potential but would reduce the strategic gap between Ellesmere Port and Eastham


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7872

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8361
EP01 (the westernmost parcels) appear to be the best option and fit for strategic growth, benefitting from dual frontages onto both the A5117 and A41, acknowledging there are floodrisk constraints further to the east and the whole area will have to address utility infrastructure  EP02 is constrained by access consideration onto the A5117 without major remodelling  EP03 could offer potential but would reduce the strategic gap between Ellesmere Port and Eastham


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7873

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8362
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7875

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8364
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7876

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8365
The options for Northwich all have something wrong with them; for instance: NOR1 at Barnton/Anderton feels as though it would need a strategic link road to service it NOR2 at Wincham suffers from poor accessibility and would lead to a remote and detached location without community infrastructure support NOR10, 11 and 12 at Weaverham may offer the best fit but this is less an expansion of Northwich and more about the re-definition of Weaverham without supporting infrastructure NOR6 will change the character of Davenham, whilst not benefitting from great access NOR7, 8 and 9 may offer the best option for Northwich (aka Hartford)


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7880

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8369
WIN 3, 4 and 7 may be more suitable locations WIN5 suffers from poor access


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.