UPSVLP 2410
To try to find ways to reduce this further.
Concern that the housing target is based on 2014 projections for housing demand still. In 2019 it was clear that 2016 projections would suggest a lower target and in the post Brexit, post Covid UK of 2021 the 2014 figures seem to be out of date and unrealistically high. Ministers seem to becoming increasingly keen to avoid building on Green Belt land. In front of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee last Monday (8th November) Housing Secretary Michael Gove also recognised the problem of out of date projections and made it clear that Councils could push back against central government targets.
Welcome recent efforts to develop own projections for economic growth rather than simply using (inevitably optimistic) figures from local business groups. However, still concerned by the elements of the plan that focus on land for logistics and distribution businesses.
Policy INF1 should include a commitment not to disadvantage the Residents in the outlying settlements and other areas where car use is the only viable transport option.
Concern about some elements of policy INF1 (particularly principles 1d and 1e) that appear to be aimed at reducing car use in Warrington. In Lymm (and I assume the other outlying settlements) public transport provision is completely inadequate for most journeys especially commuting to workplaces outside Lymm (the norm). Therefore, cars are much more of a necessity than may be the case in other parts of Warrington.
Smaller development focussed on different types of businesses, such as a science park, would deliver greater benefits for Warrington with less costs.
Objection to the proposed allocation for logistics and distribution uses.
The housing deliveryin Lymm should be spread evenly over the Plan period to minimise the impact of existing services, particularly schools and GP practices.
Still concerned about the proposed timescales for development in Lymm. Concentrating all the development at the start of the plan period will considerably exacerbate the difficulties of accommodating the infrastructure requirements of the new developments. The PDO settlement profiles document showed that Lymm?s GP surgeries are at capacity, primary schools are near capacity, the secondary school is at capacity and there are also likely capacity issues with the Leisure Centre and Dentists. Since then the situation with GP surgeries in Lymm has worsened considerably.
Concerns regarding affordable home provision in Lymm.
A better mix would be for 2/3 to ? of the affordable homes in Lymm to be for ownership. The best option would be to delegate the decision on the affordable rental to ownership ratio to Lymm Neighbourhood Plan. This seems like the sort of decision that a Neighbourhood Plan would be well placed to address.
It?s clear that there is a need for affordable homes in Lymm and the requirement for 30% affordable homes is supported. However, the 2/3 to 1/3 ratio of rental to ownership is not right for Lymm. Relative to other areas house prices in Lymm are high but this is much less the case for rented properties.
Part 4
Support for the changes to the plan since 2019, which reduce the amount of land to be removed from Green Belt from 11% to 5% of the total. Welcome the inclusion of the Fiddler?s Ferry site in the Plan and the reduction in scale of development from replacing the previous Garden Suburb plan with the South East Warrington Urban Extension. This balances things out a bit between the West and East of Warrington though the plans still skew too heavily to the South of the borough. Still concern that the reduced amount is a substantial amount of lost green space and the long term impact of this.