UPSVLP 2593
Respondent name
Dr John Cresswell
Responses
Respondent Type
Resident
Policy Name/Part of plan
Whole Plan
Legally Compliant
Yes
Sound
No
Compliant with the Duty to Co-operate
Yes
Why you consider the Draft Local Plan is not legally compliant or is unsound or fails to comply with the duty to co-operate
The priority should be to develop these ALL brownfield sites as they are released, rather than commit to the use of Greenbelt.
Why you support the legal compliance or soundness of the Draft Local Plan or its compliance with the duty to co-operate
I can see no evidence that the Plan is not legally compliant. The consultation process appears to be running as it should. The problem is with the Plan itself.
Documents
Plan appears to be driven by a desire to maximise housing development, well beyond what the proposed local economic development will require. Rate of development is still well above
Warrington?s historical peak of 545 new houses per year, and may also exceed Government guidelines. Infrastructure ?lag? will be
exacerbated with the much faster rate of development proposed. Plan proposes to build extensively on Green Belt in South Warrington rather than phasing development as brownfield sites become available. Use of Green Belt disregards criteria that governs release for development. Proposals in South Warrington will destroy the character and distinctiveness of the area while
contributing nothing towards the regeneration needs of the Town Centre. LTP4 lacks concrete proposals to address transport needs and does not take account of affordability nor address realistic timescales. No justification for scale of development in South Warrington. Plan does not meet strategic need for affordable, family housing close to centres of employment.