I am writing to express my opposition to the latest incarnation of the Local Plan you have recently put out for consultation. The grounds for my objections are as follows:
1.The plan does not give sufficient evidence that the proposed level of housing development is necessary or desirable. The growth forecast for new housing requirements in the town is completely unrealistic in any scenario let alone a post Covid era.
2.Likewise there is insufficient evidence that the proposed level of industrial and business facilities is necessary or desirable. In this context too, the growth forecast for the town is completely unrealistic in any scenario let alone a post Covid era. Neither does the plan take any account of the competing developments in Greater Manchester and Liverpool, our closest neighbours.
3.There is a lack of a clear and comprehensive plan for new road infrastructure to resolve the transport problems, private and public, of the already highly congested and polluted south Warrington area. This is particular apparent on the A49 from Junction 10 north to Stockton Heath and onwards to Warrington Town centre. The south Warrington road infrastructure relies totally on three Victorian swing bridges and a Cantilever bridge which is categorised as a ?Weak Structure?. These four crossings of the Manchester Ship Canal are totally inadequate for the sort of development proposed in the Plan with its consequent pressures on the Town Centre facilities and through routes. In any case these bridges are poorly maintained by the owners, Peel Holdings, who seem impervious to any demands by communities in the affected localities let alone by WBC that they should be properly maintained. This issue is not even mentioned in the plan.
4.No plan for housing or industrial/ business development should be implemented where there is a lack of a clear strategy and a detailed upfront commitment to road/ transport infrastructure improvement alongside associated timescales for completion, sources of funding and identification of new routes and/ or viable road improvements.
5.The creation of large numbers of additional housing will mean a commensurate requirement for medical facilities in both primary and secondary care. Warrington and Halton NHS Trust operates facilities which are in desperate need of improvement and expansion already. A new hospital to replace the two ageing facilities in Warrington and
Halton has been proposed, but not yet agreed partly because a new site for a single facility needs to be identified within the geographical boundaries of the Trust. An ideal location would have been on the land once occupied by the old Thames Board site which has been recently cleared for housing development. Similarly the release of another brownfield site at the now defunct Fiddlers Ferry Power Station would be an
ideal location for a new hospital to serve the expanded catchment envisaged by the plan. Once again though the Plan adopts a blinkered view of the use of this site and proposes yet more housing and industrial development on it.
6.The obsession of WBC with building more houses and industrial facilitates especially in the south of the town seems largely motivated, as it always had been, by the view that this area of Warrington is one where the most money per head can be generated by high council tax and business rates. Yet south Warrington has received far less investment in infrastructure especially in new roads than has the north of the town despite contributing the largest proportion of WBC?s income especially from Council Tax. This policy is unfair and is often viewed by constituents of south Warrington Wards, with some justification, as politically motivated.
7.Green belt land in Warrington has been gradually eroded by WBC planning decisions over many years. At a time when ecology and preservation of the local environment are high on the national and Global agendas WBC is proposing to destroy yet more of the precious green belt in perpetuity - once it has disappeared it can never be reinstated. It really is difficult to understand the motivation for this wanton destruction of the dwindling green space heritage of South Warrington which will destroy its character and distinctive nature for ever.
I am writing to express my opposition to the latest incarnation of the Local Plan you have recently put out for consultation. The grounds for my objections are as follows:
1.The plan does not give sufficient evidence that the proposed level of housing development is necessary or desirable. The growth forecast for new housing requirements in the town is completely unrealistic in any scenario let alone a post Covid era.
2.Likewise there is insufficient evidence that the proposed level of industrial and business facilities is necessary or desirable. In this context too, the growth forecast for the town is completely unrealistic in any scenario let alone a post Covid era. Neither does the plan take any account of the competing developments in Greater Manchester and Liverpool, our closest neighbours.
3.There is a lack of a clear and comprehensive plan for new road infrastructure to resolve the transport problems, private and public, of the already highly congested and polluted south Warrington area. This is particular apparent on the A49 from Junction 10 north to Stockton Heath and onwards to Warrington Town centre. The south Warrington road infrastructure relies totally on three Victorian swing bridges and a Cantilever bridge which is categorised as a ?Weak Structure?. These four crossings of the Manchester Ship Canal are totally inadequate for the sort of development proposed in the Plan with its consequent pressures on the Town Centre facilities and through routes. In any case these bridges are poorly maintained by the owners, Peel Holdings, who seem impervious to any demands by communities in the affected localities let alone by WBC that they should be properly maintained. This issue is not even mentioned in the plan.
4.No plan for housing or industrial/ business development should be implemented where there is a lack of a clear strategy and a detailed upfront commitment to road/ transport infrastructure improvement alongside associated timescales for completion, sources of funding and identification of new routes and/ or viable road improvements.
5.The creation of large numbers of additional housing will mean a commensurate requirement for medical facilities in both primary and secondary care. Warrington and Halton NHS Trust operates facilities which are in desperate need of improvement and expansion already. A new hospital to replace the two ageing facilities in Warrington and
Halton has been proposed, but not yet agreed partly because a new site for a single facility needs to be identified within the geographical boundaries of the Trust. An ideal location would have been on the land once occupied by the old Thames Board site which has been recently cleared for housing development. Similarly the release of another brownfield site at the now defunct Fiddlers Ferry Power Station would be an
ideal location for a new hospital to serve the expanded catchment envisaged by the plan. Once again though the Plan adopts a blinkered view of the use of this site and proposes yet more housing and industrial development on it.
6.The obsession of WBC with building more houses and industrial facilitates especially in the south of the town seems largely motivated, as it always had been, by the view that this area of Warrington is one where the most money per head can be generated by high council tax and business rates. Yet south Warrington has received far less investment in infrastructure especially in new roads than has the north of the town despite contributing the largest proportion of WBC?s income especially from Council Tax. This policy is unfair and is often viewed by constituents of south Warrington Wards, with some justification, as politically motivated.
7.Green belt land in Warrington has been gradually eroded by WBC planning decisions over many years. At a time when ecology and preservation of the local environment are high on the national and Global agendas WBC is proposing to destroy yet more of the precious green belt in perpetuity - once it has disappeared it can never be reinstated. It really is difficult to understand the motivation for this wanton destruction of the dwindling green space heritage of South Warrington which will destroy its character and distinctive nature for ever.