Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 8821

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9314
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

Comment

Representation ID: 8822

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9315
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

Comment

Representation ID: 8824

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9317
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

Comment

Representation ID: 8826

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9319
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

Comment

Representation ID: 8827

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9320
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

Comment

Representation ID: 8828

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9321
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

Comment

Representation ID: 8829

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9322
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)

Comment

Representation ID: 8830

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9323
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)

Comment

Representation ID: 8831

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9324
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)

Comment

Representation ID: 8832

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Trustees of G A Artell

Agent: J10 Planning

I&O_9325
WIN 3, 4 and 7 may be more suitable locations WIN5 suffers from poor access