Support the need for Warrington to consolidate its position as one of the most important economic hubs in the UK, which will involve the development of major new employment locations to support a range of economic activities in the B1, B2 and B8 sectors.

Support Objective W1, and the need for 316.26 hectares of employment land between 2021 and 2038. However, It is important the PSVLP plans positively to meet current and future needs, and should not place a ?cap? on otherwise sustainable development. It is noted that the word ?minimum? is used when setting the housing target, and it is considered that a comparable approach should be adopted when expressing the employment land requirements.

The employment land requirements need to be expressed as an ?at least? figure. Our Client has no objection to the continued development of Employment Area listed in Part 3 of the Policy, which it is noted includes Omega. There is no reason why the Borough?s employment needs cannot be met through more Green Belt land release within the boundary of Warrington itself. Object to the inclusion of Omega Western extension in another Borough to meet Warrington's employment land needs, when alternative employment land opportunities existing in Warrington to meet that need. Our client's site at Omega North should be included. As drafted, the PSVLP is too ?broad brush? in commenting on anticipated rates of delivery without taking account of the upfront time and works required in securing planning permission, discharging planning conditions, and undertaking upfront infrastructure works before any construction of the actual employment accommodation commences.

It is noted that the PSVLP does not include a specific policy in relation to the proposed allocation of land to the west of Omega South, located in the Borough of St Helens.

Our Client supports the need for a review of the Green Belt boundaries around Warrington and there are exceptional circumstances which justify this approach. However, it is also considered that the Green Belt review should extend further to the designation of safeguarded land for development beyond the Plan period after 2038 to ensure that boundaries can endure consistent with paragraph 143 of the NPPF. We object to the Council?s failure to identify and designate safeguarded land for employment uses.

Do not object per se to the proposed allocation but do have concerns over the timescales for delivery taking account of the works required to clear and remediate the site, as well as the significant infrastructure works required to deliver the site. There is also the requirement to demonstrate that the development of the site would not impact on the ecological value and integrity of the Mersey Estuary SPA. It is considered that this survey work should be undertaken now to inform the proposed allocation, as opposed to leaving this for a later date when the results of the survey could have fundamental implications on the scale of delivery/quantum of development at the site (and with it the Council?s development strategy). It is unclear what demand (and evidence there is) for B2 and B8 uses in this location, and it would appear that the site has been identified for employment use merely because it is a brownfield site as opposed to necessarily taking account of occupier demand to be located close to the strategic highway network.

Do not object to the allocation of this site, however do
have concerns over the deliverability of the site during the Plan period, particularly when one takes account of the comments relating to the need for funding to facilitate improvements at junction 20 of the M6. It is considered unlikely that the full 137 hectares of employment land will come forward during the Plan period given the scale of the development and infrastructure involved and further information is needed in relation to delivery rates.

The Site (13.42 hectares) lies c. 1.1km to the south of the large settlement of Burtonwood which is accessible via Clay Lane. The location of the Site would mean that it is sustainably located, providing people with good access to jobs in a sustainable location, with immediate access to the Strategic Road Network. The Site is suitable for employment uses, predominantly for B8 uses but potentially also smaller B2 general industrial units. Both uses would be capable of accommodating ancillary B1 office use associated with the main use. It is noted that the Site has not been formally assessed by the Council as part of the PSVLP evidence base documents. A range of supporting information submitted to assess the site's suitability to be allocated as an employment site in the PSVLP.