UPSVLP 0540
The policy is unsound; it does not meet the needs of the area as the infrastructure cannot cope with the proposals. It is not positively prepared. The evidence used to arrive at the housing figure is flawed and the figure is not deliverable.
The policy is unsound as it does not meet the needs of the area and the evidence used to justify the release of land for economic use is flawed.
Unrealistic and not justified to use the unprecedented supply of land at Omega to predict future economic land requirement. Green Belt release from MD6 is therefore not justified. Abundance of existing vacant office/warehouse space available. Empty employment sites should be utilised for housing to prevent Green Belt release.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area, it is unsound.
No plans for regeneration of town centre. Issue with limited essential shopping/leisure facilities in villages being replaced with new housing developments.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area, the evidence used is flawed and an alternative was to use the predicted jobs supply needs which would have resulted in a need for only around 40 hectares of land - met by Fiddlers Ferry.
No justification for Green Belt removal as evidence is flawed. Land proposed for SEWUE, SEWEA and Pool Lane site is deemed very good agricultural land, removing it from Green Belt contradicts declared Climate and Environmental Emergency. Air quality will be negatively impacted.
The policy is undeliverable and does not meet the needs of the area.
Insufficient infrastructure to cope with housing target. Existing road networks are congested, SEWEA would add to this.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area.
Infrastructure improvements needed for existing resident - broadband speeds issue for those working from home. Existing flood risk issues need addressing.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area.
No detail for provision of medical facilities. Hospital cannot cope with current population and accessibility is an issue.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area and is not deliverable.
Lack of information on funding to deliver new infrastructure. SEWUE and Lymm sites will increase car dependent residents.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area or look at alternative evidence.
Current planning policy damaging character of Warrington's suburbs. Not justified to say that new development will not have an impact on health and air quality.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area, it does not provide enough protection for the environment.
Infrastructure budget shows lack of commitment to green infrastructure. Does not provide enough protection for the environment. Wording leaves policy open to interpretation by developers.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area, it does not provide enough protection for the environment.
Infrastructure budget shows lack of commitment to green infrastructure. Does not provide enough protection for the environment. Wording leaves policy open to interpretation by developers.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area.
Nature of proposed housing estates to not enhance character.
The policy does not meet the needs of the area.
Proximity of development to motorway, increasing poor air quality in area - policy MD6 does not comply with ENV8.
Unrealistic population growth proposed by an undeliverable annual housing figure makes plan unsound. WBC has previously failed to deliver required no. of new homes. Brownfield land register not being correctly maintained, data on brownfield sites that have been granted planning permission not complete - register should be complete before Green Belt released. More affordable homes needed - plan predominantly provides expensive commuter homes - not meeting needs of local community. Housing density for town centre is too low. Current application (2017/31394) for apartment block, which has a 9 storey car park - town centre living should not be promoting car use, car park could be better used as residential units. WBC should - challenge housing target, update Part 2 of the Brownfield Register, use the number of houses given permission that are not yet built to show a forward supply of housing to be deducted from the target, challenge the 40% uplift imposed for failing to meet target over the assessed period OR delay the plan until a new algorithm is produced and continue to count any houses built in the interim period to offset the future target ie carry forward for future demand.