No exceptional circumstances for release of Green Belt in this location. The SEWUE plan does not meet the requirements of paragraphs 35 (b) and 35 (d) in that the PSV 2021 SEWUE current plan does not amount to an ?appropriate strategy?, does not meaningfully take into account ?reasonable alternatives?, and is not based on ?proportionate? evidence. The proposed SEWUE will the cover the western part of South East Warrington, which is home to irreplaceable ancient woodland designated ASNW / LWS / SBI, other key woodlands, important Local Wildlife Sites (LWSs), key natural green infrastructure, key blue infrastructure and their surrounding habitats. It will also impact negatively on the visual amenity and setting of designated conservation areas and listed buildings. There is no reference to the ecological network of The Mersey Valley Timberland Trail which will be directly impacted by the SEWUE. Biodiversity of the Bridgewater Canal will also be adversely affected. The Woodland Trust's formal objection to the allocation has been ignored. Existing natural amenities will be negatively impacted. SEWUE in its current form will remove a significant amount of Grade 2 and Grade 3 agricultural land from South Warrington. The Lanscape Character Assesment and Heritage Impact Assessment prepared in conjunction with PSV 2021 notes that the proposed SEWUE will have an impact on the unique character and setting of the area and will significantly and permanently alter the landscape. Further concern about traffic and transport in south Warrington due to the 3 waterways that must be crossed.

With the chosen location for the SEWUE, the plan fails to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services ? including the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land, and of trees and woodland as referred to in NPPF.

No excpetional circumstances demonstrated to justify the release of GB land for the South East Warrington Employment Area. Another distribution site in Warrington is not conisdered to be a sustainable source of future employment. It would lead to significant HGV traffic. Therefore propose that if an employment site is to be established in South East Warrington it would more sensible to invest in emerging areas that will be significant for the economy in twenty or thirty years? time E.g. a nationally recognised science and technology corridor ? offering jobs in science, research and development and green manufacturing. It could also offer commercial space to those businesses who perhaps cannot afford the prohibitive costs of central Manchester.

Do not propose to offer technical objections to development at Peel Hall as we are aware that there are already those who have specific expertise and knowledge of the history of the site and would offer far stronger arguments. However, offer support to those working to save this vital green space and agree that this open space should be permanently protected for the community. In an area that is already extremely densely populated this offers residents accessible ?countryside next door? ? a rare ommodity in this area of North Warrington. It also offers an important buffer from the motorway - indeed, given its proximity to the motorway we find it extraordinary that such mass development would be considered there.

There has been no impact assessment at the sites of the ASNW (Ancient Semi-Natural Woodland). The Sustainability Appraisal refers to these sites only as ?mature woodland?, not ASNW, which is misleading.

The PSV 2021 does not meet the requirements of the NPPF 2021 paragraph 174 (a), (b), (d) and (e) and NPPF 2021 paragraph 180 (c), in that it fails to ?protect and enhance valued landscapes, sites of biodiversity or geological value and soils?, fails to ?minimise impacts on and provide net gains for biodiversity?, puts important ecological networks and natural habitats including irreplaceable ASNW at risk of irreparable harm, fails to prevent ?new development from contributing to or putting at unacceptable risk, or being adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of soil, air, water and noise pollution?.