UPSVLP 2463
The DLP is unsound, and it a huge opportunity for Warrington to undo many of the mistakes made over the years. Instead the plan which uses housing numbers which are unrealistic to carve up huge areas of green belt without considering brown field land first. The town centre has huge potential to be revived by increasing housing. Areas such as the Lever Brothers site, Riverside retail park, Mr Smiths/ Buildbase/ Go Outdoors site and so on. The infrastructure is in the town centre it?s not in the areas the DLP is proposing to release for development. The plans in improve the infrastructure is very vague and for the plan to be sound this must be the starting point to build the plan around. Not a simple task given the lack of investment in infrastructure of the years and the ship canal but it needs to be resolved. Years back there was a plan for a new high level crossing which seemed crazy but it was a solution the DLP has no solutions to this major problem. Improving public transport again there is no real plan just expecting everyone to ride a bike. The proposed link from the roundabout at the top of Broad Lane to the Dipping Brook roundabout is convoluted and would not encourage traffic away from using Streeton Road. The idea that Stretton Road could be closed to through traffic is dream you are trying to sell to the Residents of the village but could never be delivered or policed. This clearly shows the plan knows there is going to be an issue with traffic and has tried to put a solution forward that could never been enforced. The increase to the Appleton Thorn Industrial Estate to create jobs is poorly represented. This development will be large logistic warehouses will very few jobs but plenty of HGV traffic. Again there are no solutions to this just a notional upgrade to the motorway junction on one site as the Lymm side is too difficult. There is a potential solution to provide an independent access into this area from the motorway junction which could take all traffic to the industrial estate but again there is no such solution provided. Given the resent focus on the challenges the World has to tackle climate change the plan complete ignores this. More reliance on cars, congested roads, and digging up the green lungs which help swallow CO2. We need more houses but we must all do our bit to save the planet for future generations, but what use are house if we are living in a greenhouse?
I am sure the council thinks they have fulfilled their duty to co-operate but they have not engaged with the local Parish Councils, local people other than telling them what they plan to do. The presentation of the DLP and requesting feedback are tick box exercises but they are not engaging with people just dictating to them. The changes to the previous draft where a matter of time moving on not responding to people concerns. The plan is essentially the same and making some concessions is the old trick in the book to gain some support.
The wording of this question is very poor, I do not support anything about this DLP. Question 3 does not ask if I support the 3 points. I have ticked yes to do I consider the DLP to be legally compliant at no point does this say support. I have ticked yes to this as there was no option for I don't know. How do I know if the Council has has done all its due diligence to ensure the plan is legal? I could not tick no so I have ticked yes as I assume the council would not be so stupid to have got this wrong. That said looking at the depth of thinking in the DLP that is a huge assumption...
There needs to be more emphasis on Town Centre development
Reduce the reliance on reducing green belt around the town
Provide firm plans for infrastructure both public and private
Provide firm plan on how the plans will deal with congestion and air quality