Object

Local Plan Main Modifications 2017

Representation ID: 70505

Received: 04/05/2017

Respondent: Miss Carol Duckfield

Representation Summary:

Proposed park and ride sites to north of Leamington are undesireable and unviable because
* no dedicated bus service
* wrong location
* no provision to make A452 a dual carriage way or for a dedicated bus lane
* deterimental to health of town centre
* contracy to existing council policy to replace existing multi storey car park

Full text:

I objected to the previous proposed park-and-ride scheme and can see no reason to change my stance as nothing has been done with this revision to address the concerns and issues previously raised
I beleive it is undesirable, unsustainable and has no valid buisness case because:
* There will be no dedicated buses, so users will have to time visits to coincide with the bus timetable assuming that the service is delivered to this timing which is unlikely a peak times due to congestion
* The location is plain wrong and will simply add congestion to a road that is aready a bottle neck at peak times and move parking approx 1m from the town centre - what does that acheive but deter visitors. It would be better if the site was focused on the A46 roundabout with the A452, which could form part of the Thickthorn development, and provide for the needs of Leamington, Warwick, Kenilworth, Warwick University and potentially Coventry.
* Much of the traffic using the A452 crosses to the south of Leamington where there are the major employers. This road is already a bottle neck at peak times for increasing periods of time and there is no provision in the plan to make this a dual carriage way and/or for a dedicated bus lane
* Shoppers are unlikely to use the park and ride when there is plenty of parking in Leamington all year round. Indeed since the introduction of on street parking what used to be fully used parking now lies empty for the majority of the day and it would seem that the town centre has declined in this period. Does the on street parking and enforcement actually cover its costs let alone generate an income?
* This is contrary to the councils other policy to replace the existing multi-storey car park and increase capacity