UPSVLP 2157
The Plan is not deliverable. The Plan will increase traffic congestion within Warrington.
The stated strategy should be to establsih non interruptible traffic flows north/south across the Borough.
Energy use and carbon neutrality get little mention in the plan.
The plan plays scant attention to these provisions particularly in the high density areas, and these needs should be accommodated. Significant improvements to the Warrington Centre environment could be made by putting a weir downstream of the town to make the river non tidal in the centre, a parkland area with riverside walks, and a hydropower station on the discharge.
If Climate Change targets are to be achieved, action is essential. All new buildings should be required to be ?Carbon Neutral? so planning requirements should necessitate district heating systems, heat pumps and effective insulation and construction. New developments should include sustainable drainage and water run off provision to minimise flooding locally and more widely. Wildlife corridors must be established which are wide enough for both wildlife and people and actually join up in a meaningful way. Surface drainage is identified as an issue and must be part of the solution rather than the problem at times of climate change. Wetlands and ponds should form part of the environment even in urban areas, and ensuring environmental standards are established and implemented on the large scale must form part of the development strategy. Allotments as a green activity and for recreation should be fundamental part of any urban area, in addition to gardens and green spaces.
The arguments against the proposed Green Belt developments are not adequately presented and brownfield sites could be more widely used. It is also disappointing to see that significant development of Green Belt sites has already taken place since the previous plans were withdrawn.
The details around the provision of affordable housing and disability provision are very important. In a high cost development, affordability is always going to be an issue, and a 20-30% discount on an expensive development still does not lead to affordability, without major reductions in standards. A level of realism is required which is not apparent in the proposals, and ?affordable housing? should not be distinguishable from the ?unaffordable housing? of the immediate surroundings.
Although the Plan proposals state that developers must provide adequate infrastructure investments to support the industry and housing objectives before major building starts and not afterwards, it is difficult to see how this will happen in practice to the levels required. The planned social and physical infrastructure for the South East Urban Extension will not be delievered because developers will cherry pick the lucrative activity of house building and ignoring or circumvent the requirement to provide these features.
There is a very high level of uncertainty around the likelihood of the involved parties being able to carry out the detailed actions proposed on the timescales given. The council record of delivery on previous promises is appalling and this plan gives little credibility to the idea that things could be improved. Any increase in shipping on the MSC and movement of swing bridges creates traffic chaos, particularly if coincidental with issues on the M62/M6/M56 road network. The plan objectives can only be achieved by ensuring that the Western Link Road proposal is confirmed and that the new/replacement high level bridge to the east of the Centre is actually commissioned instead of merely being reserved land, as it has been for the last 35 years. Nothing in the plan suggests that there is any priority or even a chance of success in getting approval and funding for these activities.