No mention of the impact of the SEUE will have on Stockton Heath this is a serious error.

The proposed development of the SEUE relies on a new strategic route that from the Cat and Lion junction across Stretton, Appleton and Grappenhall. There is no evidence on its modelling and to show what its purpose is. It should be in place prior to the development taking place but there is currently no funding identified. Nor will it relieve congestion on the A49.

There is no impact assessment of the impact of the new road on junction 9 of the M56.

No mention of additional measures for cyclist, there are no routes planned for the A49 or A56.

A carbon zero target sits better within a sustainable objective rather than a proposal to build 4,200 houses in south Warrington.

The plan fails to recognise that most traffic uses the A49 and uses junctions including the Cat and Lion along its extent. There is no reference to crossing the Bridgewater Canal and hump backed bridges under the canal. Building on Stockton Lane is unsustainable.

There is mention of a potential new bridge over the Manchester Ship Canal. There is no guarantee this will be delivered so the present situation extreme of congestion will continue.

The consequence of 4,200 houses will drive air quality down for the whole population of Warrington. Warrington already has the worst rate of small particle pollution in the UK. If the plan is passed then the 17 point Air Quality Mitigation Action plan will not mitigate the current situation.

Release of 116 hectares of land in strongly performing Green Belt is not sustainable. The land will be developed for speculative logistics and will rely on workers using their own cars to commute to the location.

There is no evidence of a systematic ecological assessment in south Warrington. The HRA is similar to that used for the 2014 Local Development Plan which concentrates on SSSIs some which are out of the Borough. There is no statement in the proposed plan of how the WBC expects to preserve the ecology and benefits of the 1,715 hectares of Green Belt land in Appleton Parish that will be destroyed as part of the allocation policies.

The submission draft draws heavily on the ARUP assessment. The loss of Green Belt in South Warrington is disproportionate. There are areas in the north and north east of Warrington that could take more development. This includes Burtonwood, win wick, Croft and Culcheth without conflict of Green Belt purposes.

The 2014 adopted Local Plan allowed for the continuous protection of the countryside and settlements through the Green Belt allocation. The proposed submission version makes no mention of preserving the Green Belt. And only states that 'Warrington's places will be maintained and enhanced...' The scale of development proposed will lead to the loss of the historic landscape. Local Planning should identify and assess the significance of local heritage where impacted by proposals for development. Development should be resisted unless public benefit outweigh harm.

The only justification for the predicted levels of growth appears to be the expansion of logistics in south Warrington. There is a mismatch in number of jobs and housing , with no evidence those taking the jobs can afford the properties on offer. The developer will not build the 30% affordable and the cheapest house that is affordable at the Pewterspear development is ?230k. Affordability rules will need to change so they are based on a percentage of income rather than arbitrary market price.

Lack of clarity on housing need and numbers. No guarantees that the houses will be of the type and value required by the housing market.

Lack of clarity on housing need and numbers. No guarantees that the houses will be of the type and value required by the housing market.

The NPPF sets out at paragraph 8 that the delivery of infrastructure is key to sustainable communities. The figures in the IDP that support delivery of Infrastructure are not sound. This includes those for health which underestimate current and potential need against development. The draft plan states there is an additional health facility to be provided through SWUE. How can this be sound when there is no funding confirmed, the CCG stipulates there needs to be a critical mass of patients before a new centre is commission and can a new facility at Appleton Cross and SEUE be delivered. This is not sound.

The draft Plan is unsound because it take no account of the impact of the effects of additional housing on Stockton Heath with regards to local road networks, traffic, air quality and supporting social infrastructure (health and schools).