I believe the Winwick (OS6) and Peel Hall (MD4) proposed developments in the Warrington draft plan are unsound because:
A. Traffic -the lack of road infrastructure (MD4 & OS6)
B. Education - Winwick Primary School (OS6)
C. NHS and support services (linked to OS6)
D. Quality of life for Residents
A. Traffic Winwick Parish ? Golborne Road and Waterworks Lane
The reviewing of traffic conditions already on Golborne Road has indicated the need to slow down and reduce the traffic burden of cars and HGV vehicles on this road and whilst measures have been considered, they are not adhered to and are ineffective. By building more houses on this Green belt will bring with it a larger volume of traffic that will be unmanageable as it leaves the housing area and heads down either Golborne Road or Waterworks lane. The proposed site for housing also has a public right of way around it. Waterworks Lane is a narrow road that is used by local people and dog walkers to gain exercise and ?fresh? air. It is also used by large farming vehicles that at times block the lane as they cannot be passed. Waterworks Lane is not a suitable road for large volumes of personal traffic or delivery vehicles and would require substantial investment to make it suitable. The road would need to be widened and a pathway and cycle path put in place. What consideration has been given to road traffic management for this proposed housing development? Turning out of Waterworks Lane onto Myddleton Lane is already difficult and the junction is in front of the primary school, at the other end is the link road with a very short ?run in? to the dual carriage way. The road network that will be affected by this proposed new development will bring Winwick Village (North of M62) and Winwick Parish, south of the M62 to a standstill. I understand that traffic from the Peel Hall development will be directed down Mill Lane to Delph Lane to Southworth Road / Myddleton Lane. Delph Lane is not designed for two way traffic on a normal day. This road has no capacity to be widened and at certain points there is no pathway and again no scope to put one in.

B - With regard to Winwick Primary School and secondary education (OS6)
The school struggles annually to cater for the increased number of families that have moved into the area due to the increased number of houses. The intake is ?one-form entry?, this means 30 pupils admitted for each year group, yet they are constantly over-subscribed resulting in local children not being able to attend their village school. Measures have been taken to attempt to address this, however there is no possibility of expanding the school building. Consequently, building more houses off Golborne Road will mean that local children will not be catered for locally. Also transition from Primary to High school is already an issue with insufficient number of places at the two nearest Warrington High Schools, more houses-brings more families- and so more school places are required. What if any plans are in place to build more schools in the Winwick area? I have read nothing that shows development of these support services. Additionally, more children and families bring more cars for taking the children to school. The village cannot cope with the car parking situation at the moment and will only get worse with more houses.
Secondary school provision for Winwick is most likely accessed at Culcheth High School or Beamont Collegiate Academy. Culcheth High School has limited capacity. This is forecast to be used up early in the plan period although capacity may begin to emerge later on in the plan period. There is not any potential for expansion due to site constraints and HSE exclusion zones. Beamont Collegiate Academy currently has limited capacity, but is predicted to be at or near capacity and the option to expand if required is limited. With very little or no capacity it is not clear how access to secondary schools can be considered to be good with an additional 405 house units proposed of which 200 will be in Culcheth directly opposite Culcheth High School. It is extremely unlikely that the local secondary schools will have sufficient capacity particularly when, in addition, consideration must also be given to the 1200 homes that have been approved on Peel Hall Farm which is situated between Winwick and Beamont Collegiate Academy.

C ? NHS and support services
There is already a need to review and increase the number of Medical Centres/doctors and dentists in this area. It is already impossible to register for a dentist when moving to Winwick. More houses bring with it the need for more medical support services, the NHS and Warrington Hospital is on its knees trying to cater for people. All the housing developments around Westbrook identify the need for such support services as doctors and dentists cannot take on more patients. This will surely be the case around Winwick too. The village has no doctor, dentist or Chemist with Residents having to travel to Culcheth and Earlstown where additional housing would add to lists and cause further delays for treatment. There are no real facilities to sustain additional housing, particularly as Earlstown and Vulcan have already had massive housing developments, absorbing the few remaining doctor and dental places.

D. Quality of life for Residents
I have lived and worked in this area of Warrington for 30years, believe me that we do not need to remove any more open land for housing developments. We need open land to have a good and healthy quality of life.
There is an electricity pylon in the proposed area with the cables running across the area. There have been various studies on the effects of these on Residents living near to Pylons. The study most often referred to is by Dr Gerald Draper of the Child Cancer Research Group at Oxford and was published in the British Medical Journal. It found that children living within 200 metres of a pylon were 70% more likely to develop Leukaemia. Surely this is an extremely worrying factor to be considered.
Wildlife - There are several bird species such as Buzzards, Kestrels and even a long eared Owl which have been seen hunting in this area. Any development here would certainly remove part of their hunting ground and most likely move them away. Bats have also been seen and their habitat and roosting must be considered. Other birds and smaller animals all the way up the food chain inhabit here and in the hedgerows. Changes would have a detrimental effect on them.
The supposed development has been advised to be of affordable pricing, but figures suggested they will be in the region of ?250k +, this is not affordable housing, not many first time buyers could afford this price.
This proposal, along with Parkside and the large distribution centres on the M62 at Junction 8 (and potentially a new service station at Junction 11) have and will severely impact on human life, Residential areas and the quality of health. We need open spaces to allow people to walk, stretch and exercise for the sake of their health and mental health.

The plan has been prepared using out of date information, for example studies from as far back as 2017. It identifies some issues but fails to state what those issues are and how they will be addressed. It fails to adequately identify the impact on current infrastructure and how it will be improved to accommodate the increased number of houses, traffic and population. The plan suggests that further empirical assessments and investigations will need to be carried out. However, there is no indication that these have taken place or what the outcome of them are. How can the people of Warrington, and Winwick in particular, be expected to be fairly consulted on a plan and to give meaningful feedback with so many vague comments, inaccuracies and incomplete information? Consequently, this Plan does not meet the ?tests of soundness?.
For the Residents of Winwick in particular, and Warrington in general, the consultation process does not provide an appropriate opportunity to give meaningful and effective feedback on the proposals. There are vague statements or comments, use of inaccurate and/or out of date information on the settlement profiles and a total lack of clear evidence and adequate information about the impact of the proposals on the current infrastructure and how these will be addressed and resolved.