Q-I4.1: Should we include a policy to safeguard specific infrastructure schemes within the SWLP?
It is not necessary to safeguard land in WDC for a Park & Ride scheme as no evidence of need has been demonstrated and the proposals are now outdated.
Where are the Warwick District infrastructure needs? These are all Stratford District. That is the worry with an all south Warwickshire plan, that Stratford's infrastructure takes precedence and Warwick is ignored. Where is the additional bridge over the Avon in Warwick to stop the bottlenecks on the bridges? When are you going to realise no one likes park and ride schemes? Look at other areas. No one uses them.
There is no reason for keeping plans that are out of date and plans should be responsive to current problems, such as preserving green spaces and prime greenbelt in a post-covid climate, not old pre-covid issues.
Better transport solutions needed across Stratford Upon Avon and beyond.
The consultation states, "In light of the new growth required across South Warwickshire up to 2050, a review of infrastructure needs is required so that measures can be put in place to ensure that this new growth is supported by appropriate and timely infrastructure". CPRE considers that the scale of new growth outside existing urban areas proposed is higher than is going to take place since the population and household growth projections are too high, and the capacity of existing urban areas to accommodate more housing is greater than the Issues & Options assumes. Our submitted report explains the reasons for this. Of the infrastructure safeguarding listed: CPRE supports: Stratford to Honeybourne former railway – safeguarding the route of the former railway south of Stratford-upon-Avon to Honeybourne to facilitate re-opening. CPRE opposes safeguarding the Stratford South Western Relief Road proposal; this is a costly and undelierable scheme which was inserted into the Stratford District Core Strategy at a very late stage and as a safeguarded alignment in that Plan was never subject to public consultation in the normal way.
There are several examples of road improvements specific to Stratford-upon-Avon included within the consultation documentation, e.g. A46 Improvements. Though the exact schemes which should be safeguarded would be subject to a later consultation for the plan, the principal of doing so is supported by the Town Council.
No answer given
The exact schemes should be safeguarded would be subject to a laterconsultation for the plan.
The A46 corridor should be protected for proposed upgrades. There should be a presumption not to build new roads but concentrate on judicial improvements to existing roads and walking / cycling provision invested in Any new road or road improvement must have cycle walking provision imbedded in the design.
Yes, HLM consider a policy should be included that safeguards specific infrastructure. This should include the Coventry South Rail Station and Public Transport Interchange, Track widening of the Leamington to Coventry Rail Line, Coventry’s Very Light Rail Track Proposals, and the A46 Strategic Link Road as illustrated within the Vision Document. Any designation on the Proposals Map will need to identify a zone to allow flexibility at the detailed design stage.
More emphasis on rail. Move away from road
No answer given
Before deciding on a policy there should be a detailed review of the impact on climate change for every scheme to confirm whether they are still consistent with the overall aims of the SWDP.
I note that many concrete examples are given for large road building schemes, but none at all for projects to aid biodiversity, or tackle today's air-pollution hotspots, or create cycleways or making public spaces safer for pedestrians.
S106 Agreements and planning conditions have been used for local infrastructure requirements on the Meon Vale site, but specific highway improvements have not been completed, and provision of local public open space, habitat protection, access footpaths and roads have been paid for by the residents not the developers in management fees, and officers in Stratford upon Avon authorised modification of the affordable housing provisions contained within the S.106 Agreement dated 2nd April 2015 in connection with planning permission reference 14/01186/OUT so that any C2 accommodation provided as part of the development is not subject to affordable housing requirements. This is not a good look for the future of safeguarding infrastructure. Again there needs to be joined up thinking relation to the protected areas. With little hope that infrastructure will be developed with the failure so far of developers to invest in a by-pass which has been under discussion for years. It was rumoured that the development of Meon Vale would be supported by significant upgrade of the main road in and out of the area. So far, the road has been subjected to constant temporary traffic lights and road closures. We have already seen the effect of large lorries travelling from the industrial estate in Long Marsden. Village roads around small conurbations like Bidford-on-Avon have been significantly damaged, holes, broken curbs and other effects of heavy vehicles running constantly on inadequate small roads. Even lorries stuck on the historic bridge at Bidford, which is an historical monument and grade 1 listed. Even before the discussions have been outlined fully the route encompassing a rail route in and out has been rejected as uneconomical. Alternatively, we have the M40 and HS2 to the north east of Warwickshire giving a much better existing infrastructure. The A46 does not have any access from the Southern section of Warwickshire. To reach the A46 anyone coming from South Warwickshire would have to travel through Stratford-upon-Avon, which is significantly congested. There are two routes from Waitrose. Both have massive problems with the build-up of traffic. A439 has build-up of traffic coming in especially during holiday and weekend tourist visits or A3400 which is traditionally overused. A section of the A4300 around Stratford and past the leisure centre is congested much of the day. A consideration of Meon Vale/Long Marsden would have to look at the underlying effects on towns and communities in a wider area. This does not seem to have happened. Clopton bridge late medieval.
No answer given
No answer given
Some of these schemes are unnecessary and suboptimal. They are piecemeal and show no overall integrated transport strategy. There is no benefit to South Warwickshire with HS2 for example. Why just park & ride for North Leamington?
M40 and M42 land for widening is not needed and alternatives should be sought.
None
Consider rail infrastructure for the new town at Kineton. There is already the rail link to DM Kineton. Also consider stations on the Chiltern line south of Leamington.
There should be no blanket provision. It is easy to see the attraction of Section 106 and other agreements to cash strapped councils but they are almost always ultimately self-defeating or result in the waste of money on unnecessary or vanity projects. Almost every development these days is associated with wasteful and often pointless changes to road layouts etc. simply as a way of spending the money. There is no such thing as free money and in the end the only purpose these contributions serve is to put up the price of the housing (affordable or otherwise) that the council is trying to provide.
The Honeybourne rail line should be protected, and indeed every effort should be made to reopen it. Road-building, however, is a mobility solution that belongs to the past. Building more roads, and widening existing roads, leads to more driving, and takes people away from alternative modes of transport. Congestion levels are thus reestablished in the medium to long term, with more cars on the road, as the academic literature on induced road travel shows. New solutions are needed for a net zero age.
20. Yes, HLM consider a policy should be included that safeguards specific infrastructure. This should include the Coventry South Rail Station and Public Transport Interchange, Track widening of the Leamington to Coventry Rail Line, Coventry’s Very Light Rail Track Proposals, and the A46 Strategic Link Road as illustrated within the Vision Document. Any designation on the Proposals Map will need to identify a zone to allow flexibility at the detailed design stage.
Terra agree with the general principle of safeguarding land to deliver infrastructure schemes. This strategy was taken within the Stratford-on-Avon Core Strategy where the Council identified a number of projects. However, some projects, namely the Stratford South Western Relief Road, have yet to be realised due to environmental and physical constraints, as well as fundamental funding gaps. Further, a number of theallocations within the Core Strategy are reliant upon the delivery of the Relief Road and this has thereforeconstrained their delivery. Terra agree it is important to forward Plan for fundamental infrastructure projects and appropriately safeguard land in order to realise them, but Terra would caution the Councils relying on the delivery of these projects too heavily prior to assessing their realistic deliverability.
Terra agree with the general principle of safeguarding land to deliver infrastructure schemes. This strategy was taken within the Stratford-on-Avon Core Strategy where the Council identified a number of projects. However, some projects, namely the Stratford South Western Relief Road, have yet to be realised due to environmental and physical constraints as well as fundamental funding gaps. Further, a number of the allocations within the Core Strategy have been held to the delivery of the Relief Road which has compromised their delivery. Terra agree it is important to forward Plan for fundamental infrastructure projects and appropriately safeguard land in order to realised them, but Terra would caution the Councils relying on the delivery of these projects too heavily prior to assessing the realistic deliverability.
The HS2 line is identified as a specific safeguarding provision that current exists. We agree that this line should continue to be safeguarded and in accordance with national planning policy (para 22 of the NPPF), the SWLP should actively consider the opportunities it presents when determining the growth strategy.
3.10 The delivery of the A46 Link Road should be safeguarded within the SWLP to ensure that, where reasonable, sufficient funding from the delivery of new homes can help support the overall costs of the road. It is anticipated that the Business Case will be submitted and approved by the DfT ahead of the adoption of the SWLP, therefore the SWLP should make sufficient provisions to ensure this key piece of infrastructure is safeguarded. 3.11 The Site will bring forward a new internal road as part of the development proposals, to support the delivery of new homes at this Site. The internal road will be designed to ensure it could be extended to connect to the A46 Link Road to support its delivery, as well as enhancing permeability.
No answer given