TR5 Safeguarding for Transport Infrastructure
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 64689
Received: 10/06/2014
Respondent: MRS Antoinette Sant Cassia
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
NO TO A PARK AND RIDE
Already a Park and Ride at Parkway
Sites on Green Belt not "Special Circumstances"
No dedicated buses so useless for workers and shoppers
Already enough car parks in North Leamington
Plan will fail and developers will come in.
Leamington Spa is a small town and does not need another Park and Ride in the North. There is one already five minutes down the A46 at Parkway.There is also adequate parking in the town.
Worst of all the sites are on the Green Belt and a Park and Ride is definitely not by any stretch of the imagination "Special Circumstances".
The whole idea is flawed:
1.Sites earmarked are too close to the town centre and the Park and Ride will not be used nor will it reduce congestion.
2. No dedicated buses:Who is going to pay and wait maybe half an hour for a bus which may or may not take them near their place or work.
3.Inconvenient for shoppers who will also have to wait for a bus and then have to carry their shopping back on the bus.
4.There are already too many car parks in North Leamington with impervious surfaces which will contribute to flooding additionally all sites are on slopes.
This plan will fail, more Green Belt would have been destroyed and developers will come in by default. Maybe that is what you want but we definitely do not.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 64924
Received: 17/06/2014
Respondent: Derek Murray
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
I object to the park and ride scheme in Blackdown as it is so close to the town centre and as there will be no dedicated bus' it would not work anyway. This will then enable the council to take away green belt status from the area thus allowing developers to build on the only green belt left between Kenilworth and Leamington. I assume this is a back handed way of getting this to actually happen? Please stop this ridiculous exercise.
I object to the park and ride scheme in Blackdown as it is so close to the town centre and as there will be no dedicated bus' it would not work anyway. This will then enable the council to take away green belt status from the area thus allowing developers to build on the only green belt left between Kenilworth and Leamington. I assume this is a back handed way of getting this to actually happen? Please stop this ridiculous exercise.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65061
Received: 22/06/2014
Respondent: Mr Peter Robbins
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Objection to Park and Ride in North of Leamington as unsustainable and no value. Limited support for Park and Ride in South of Leamington.
Objection to Park and Ride in North of Leamington. Limited support for Park and Ride in South of Leamington.
Objection: The potential for a park and ride to the North of Leamington appears to have been added very late to plan process and with little analysis.
Objection: The North Leamington locations are very unlikely to produce a sustainable park and ride scheme.
Objection: There are exceptionally few successful park and ride schemes, Statford upon Avon is a close example of a scheme which has not been taken up by drivers. Leamington is not likely to be able to attract shoppers in competition with the likes of Solihull and '0ut of Town' by forcing people to park and then pay to catch a scheduled bus to town.
Objection: The North Leamington locations are also too close to town meaning car users gain very little and have the inconvenience of having to swap from car to bus. They will therefore drive past the Park and Ride and park in town.
Objection: The North Leamington location can only be used for Leamington and does not help Warwick.
Support: A park and ride to the south might have the ability to ferry people both to Leamington and Warwick. This may help reduce the perceived concerns over increasing traffic in Warwick Town centre.
Support: A well placed park and ride in the south, with good cycle links to the proposed new estates, may provide people with the potential to access Leamington and Warwick from home without a car.
Support: A park and ride to the south catches people coming from Its primary feeder roads from the M40.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65317
Received: 25/06/2014
Respondent: Mr Robert Solt
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The Plan provides for a Park and Ride facility North of Leamington, to which the Parish Council has already objected. This representation gives additional reasons why Park and Ride here is unlikely to be widely used; and why much of the designated area would be wholly unsuitable in any case.
Area of search for park and ride - #5.59.3.
I wish to support the view of the Old Milverton and Blackdown Parish Council, that the potential Park and Ride locations in our Parish would not offer an attractive alternative to commuters driving into Leamington.
The Parish Council has set out its reasons, with which I agree, and to which I would like to add these further observations: -
The majority of people who want to park in Leamington are there for shopping, or because they work there. In my own shopping trips into the town I can always park not too far from where I want to go; should that become much more difficult and we had the option of park and ride, this household would - for just the reasons given by our Parish Council - do its shopping in Kenilworth; if that also becomes difficult, it would increasingly divert us towards supermarkets with car parks and to buying things on the web.
As to people who work in Leamington: - I have over the past many months noticed a slowly growing number of cars parked during the day on the meter-free streets round the town centre. I don't know, but I am guessing that quite a few of those belong to people who leave their car there for the day and walk to their work in the metered town centre. The extra walk allows them to keep the independence of getting into their own car and driving off when they want to. I suspect that many would not give this up lightly in favour of using park and ride. I have not found anything in the Local Plan about expected growth of parking requirements or about intended parking restrictions that might make park and ride more attractive.
In that context: - much residential accommodation in Leamington is taken up by students of the University of Warwick. Is there any prospect of re-locating them to within walking or cycling distance of the University, and so allow student residences in Leamington to be re-converted for people who work in the town?
Reverting to Park and Ride, the comments below relate only to areas identified on the map as potential park and ride locations in Blackdown and which are adjacent to Sandy Lane.
Access from the A452 Kenilworth Road to Sandy Lane was closed only a little over a dozen years ago. Our (Old Milverton and Blackdown) Parish Council on which I then served were given to understand that this was to reduce the traffic on Sandy Lane, because of the accidents experienced on its crossing with Stoneleigh road.
A park and ride off Sandy Lane - if it did prove successful would have many cars turn across the adjoining main roads on their way in or out at peak times.
The original intention was for Sandy Lane to be wholly closed against the A452. However, Sandy Lane drops away from the Stoneleigh Road on a fairly steep hill and this section freezes over in cold winters. It was after we had drawn attention to this danger that the one-way exit on to the A452 towards Leamington was allowed.
One can envisage new road layouts (roundabouts, restricted access, one-way traffic) to avoid the dangers inherent in this location; but they would involve additional cost or make the scheme even less attractive to users and it seems to make this a wholly inappropriate area to consider for park and ride under any circumstances.
Finally, 5.59.3 says that the Strategic Transport Assessment Phase 3 (May 2013) identified the potential for a park and ride facility to the south of Warwick and Leamington. There is no indication that such a facility is required to the north of Leamington, especially in the Green Belt, and the proposed area of search should be removed from the Plan.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65584
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Stoneleigh & Ashow Parish Council
Agent: Parklands Consortium Ltd
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The Green belt sites indicated for the area of park and ride search are not sound as they are not located at a strategic close to the envelopes of the towns of Kenilworth or Leamington Spa and would create urban sprawl in the Green Belt as they will require large areas of hard surface, lighting and bus shelters. Alternative areas which are more sound should be considered as part of the area of study for the Park and Ride facility.
TR5 Stoneleigh and Ashow Parish Council
Warwick District Council Local Plan 2014 Publication Draft TR5
Paragraph Number 5.59.3.
Policy maps 5 and 12
The proposal is not sound and is
Not justified and Not consistent with National Policy.
The area of search for the Park and Ride facility to the south of Leamington are all located in green belt areas adjacent to the A452 The sites are not located on a Strategic Road Link or in an ideal position for a transport interchange.
However the Councils projections of population numbers through to 2029 are from the (SHMA of 2013) and the revised ONS data (May 2014) indicates much slower growth and the NPPF requirement to use current data to determine housing targets may allow Green Belt area previously required to meet housing short falls to be considered within the park and ride study area.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65656
Received: 24/06/2014
Respondent: Mr Richard Sharman
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Search for site for Park & Ride
The scheme is far too close to the town centre to be worthwhile and it would shift traffic problems to areas around Blackdown and Old Milverton. It would not be used. It would destroy valuable green belt that cannot be replaced
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65664
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Barbara Hingley
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
We have previously responded to the new Local Plan at consultation stage but not in respect of "park and ride". The areas of search, we understand, include the Blackdown area. The Park and Ride scheme in ill conceived and potentially a costly venture. It is unlikely to get much use without a dedicated bus service and even with a dedicated bus service it is unlikely to get much use. We consider the provision of park and ride in this particular area should be abandoned.
We have previously responded to the new Local Plan at consultation stage but not in respect of "park and ride". The areas of search, we understand, include the Blackdown area. The Park and Ride scheme in ill concieved and potentially a costly venture. It is unlikely to get much use without a dedicated bus service and even with a dedicated bus service it is unlikely to get much use. We consider the provision of park and ride in this particular area should be abandoned.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65731
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Mrs J Bradley
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The park and ride scheme suggested will work as it is stands for the following reasons:
1. Too near to Leamington to attract people to use it.
2. No dedicated free bus to transport people. Having to rely on timetabled buses will amek people disinlined to use it. (Few schemes in England work - Oxford is the exception).
3. At present, parking in Leamington for shopping is feasible.
Concenred that the scheme is to use Green Belt land which should be protected. If the scheme is unsuccessful this land could well be passed to a developer and unsuitable building on this land would ensue.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65744
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Mrs Norma Russell
Legally compliant? No
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
There is no basis for the proposed P&Rs. Parking in Leamington for shoppers and commuters is already adequate and so the P&R will not be used. Parking is important to the vitality of the town centre.
Without a dedicated bus service, commuters are unlikely to use the park and ride.
A large hard surface close to the rive could affect flooding.
the area is green belt and the proposals do not justify further degradation of the green belt.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65755
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: mr john clutton
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The plan and policy TR5 sets out two areas of search for park and ride facilities. No real need for the facilities has been identified. They are very likely to fail and the area would become redundant and then 'available ' for development in the Green Belt which is unnaceptable.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65864
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Warwickshire County Council Physical Assets Business Unit
Agent: Savills
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Warwickshire County Council (WCC) considers that the approach that Warwick District Council (WDC) has taken to the delivery of park and ride facilities through the Local Plan Publication Draft consultation document is justifiable. It is reasonable to identify broad areas of search for a park and ride facility to the south of Gallows Hill / Harbury
Lane, which have potential to accommodate a park and ride facility, should one be deemed appropriate, desirable, viable and feasible which does not compromise the ability to plan and bring forward development in the preferred development allocation locations to the south of Warwick and Leamington, is considered to be a reasonable
approach.
See attachment
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65887
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Mr D J Brocklebank
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The park and ride proposals for north of Leamington will not be effective as there is no dedicated bus service meaning users will have to coincide with existing bus timetables. the site is too close to the town and is unlikely to save time for commuters, There is already adequate parking in Leamington.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65895
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Mr Michael Kelsey
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The proposals for a P&R to north of Leamington is poorly considered an undefined. This is a prominent position but will be unused and will be a waste of public funds.
The proposal will not work for the following reasons:
a) If required, a more effective scheme could be developed at Thickthorn to serve all three towns.
b) make better use of Warwick Parkway to reduce congestion and pollution.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65897
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Mrs Ann Kelsey
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The proposals for a P&R to north of Leamington is poorly considered an undefined. This is a prominent position but will be unused and will be a waste of public funds.
The proposal will not work for the following reasons:
a) the site is too close to Leamington
b) commuters will still have to drive
c) the proposals will have a negative and significant impact on the green belt, particularly as the green belt is under threat from other sources.
d) commuters would still have to travel on congested roads and would have to wait to for the bus. There is therefore no incentive to use it.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 65985
Received: 26/06/2014
Respondent: Mr A McGregor
Agent: Howkins & Harrison
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The proposals for P&R at Blackdown are not consistent with national policy (NPPF para 80 and 90) and/or are not justified.
Locating a P&R here is inconsistent with the Local Plan spatial strategy which concentrates development to the south of the towns. There is no proven justification for a P&R here.
The STA phase justifies a P&R to the south of Leamington and Warwick. However, none of the reasons given for this apply to the north of Leamington - it is not close to development; it does not serve both towns and bus priority measures have not been identified.
If a P&R were justified north of Leamington it should be located close to the A46 junction.
The land at Balckdown has been identified as high landscape value and the area is mainly residential in nature.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66000
Received: 23/06/2014
Respondent: Old Milverton & Blackdown JPC
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The Green Belt to the North of Leamington is a vital buffer to prevent Leamington, Kenilworth and Warwick coalescing. The possible development of a "park and ride" scheme will result in the increasing urbanisation of the area.
The proposed sites are too close to Leamington Spa to be of value to commuters to wait and pay for a bus. Furthermore there will not be dedicated buses to shuttle commuters in to Leamington and users will have to time visits to coincide with the bus timetable.
The Parish Council does not believe that the proposed Park and Ride scheme will be an attractive alternative to commuters driving in to Leamington.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66174
Received: 25/06/2014
Respondent: Dr Andrew Entwistle
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The proposal for a P&R north of Leamington threatens the green belt
The proposals will not be effective as it is poorly connected, bus reliability is poor, bus fares are expensive, it is inconvenient to use for shopping, there is affordable parking in Leamington, it could have an impact on flooding and it would be expensive to implement and run.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66179
Received: 25/06/2014
Respondent: CWLEP Planning Business Group
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Wording on Kenilworth Station is a little cautious in tone
Warwick District Council Local Plan Consultation:
Response from Coventry and Warwickshire Local Enterprise Partnership
Thank you for inviting the CWLEP to comment on your Local Plan consultation.
The CWLEP notes that the Local Plan submission draft has been positively prepared and supports the growth ambitions of the C&W SEP for growth and investment. However more reference should be made to the overarching framework for growth and positive statements toward achieving inward investment and economic growth in line with the NPPF.
The CWLEP recognises that the pre submission Local Plan makes strong connection between the need for employment growth and housing growth. However, the CWLEP questions whether the plan makes adequate provision for new employment land, in terms of quantum, location and choice. Policy DS8 states the Council will provide for a minimum of 66 hectares and paragraph 2.29 says there is a need to allocate 19 to 29 hectares of new employment land. However Policy DS9 only allocates 19.7 hectares (plus an allowance for local needs at the sub-regional site). Furthermore both Policy DS8 and DS9 are framed to meet 'local needs' whereas an objective of the SEP is to also encourage and support inward investment. The policies need to be flexible and to enable the decision-taker to be responsive to meeting business needs. The CWLEP would advise that strong consideration should be given to the employment land study (the Atkins study).
The allocation of land in the vicinity of Coventry Airport as a sub-regional employment site (Policy DS9) supports the SEP. However Policy MS2: Major Sites in the Green Belt does not support the SEP. The local plan should take a more positive stance to the sites identified, which includes Honiley Airfield at Fen End, rather than merely comment that "there may be very special circumstances to justify further development." If this were to be the case there would be no need for the policy at all as further development could be allowed under existing Green Belt policy. The policy should identify the sites for development and set down development management criteria, which should include for flexibility in proposed uses.
Policy EC1 fails to comply with the policies of the NPPF in relation to opportunities for SMEs. The NPPF provides for the conversion of existing buildings (not just as part of a farm diversification scheme) plus the erection of well-designed new buildings within rural areas. The NPPF also provides for the replacement of a building. These forms of development do not appear to be provided for in the plan (except in the Green Belt). There should also be no need in EC1 - In rural areas, criterion e) to limit support to just the growth and expansion of 'existing rural businesses and enterprise'. In line with the SEP and NPPF the policy should allow for new business start-ups and enterprises moving into the area. The provision and effect of the policy is inconsistent with the explanation to it.
The CWLEP considers that there are a number of potential missed opportunities:
* Rail links - Warwick Parkway/Leamington stations should be identified and the implications should be considered. There could be opportunities to encourage sustainable interchange facilities and at Leamington there could be issues associated with the gyratory at Old Warwick Rd/Bath St/Spencer St/Lower Avenue.
* Employment sites - Notwithstanding the Green Belt issues at Fen End, Stoneleigh Park and Thickthorn the document is a bit cautious in tone. In addition, there should be a commitment for the monitoring and alignment of employment with the needs of business and investment, which should be based on evidence of revised economic forecasts.
* Kenilworth Station - a bit cautious in tone
* High Employment/housing ratio - This is potentially quite difficult in that it raises long term development issues that could lead to housing choices needing to be made in the future presenting WDC with some very difficult strategic housing land decisions about the whole balance of the development of Warwick/Leamington. This could eventually lead to a need to consider Green Belt releases to the north.
* Policy EC1 could be more positively worded, for example, it could be amended to read "It is not clear whether Policy EC1 applies equally within and beyond the Green Belt"?
* Monitoring and review - there should be a commitment from each Council and the C&W LEP area on monitoring and alignment employment. This monitoring data would identify the needs of business and investment should be based on evidence on revised economic outlook/forecasts and current market conditions. This data will also help to guide the alignment between housing and employment land provision for the sub-region.
CWLEP Planning Business Group, June 2014.
----
Please see the below e-mail sent on behalf of the CWLEP:
Please note that the response submitted on behalf of the CWLEP to the WDC Local Plan contained a minor error - please disregard the suggestion that policy EC1 should be more positively worded.
Kind regards
Lizzie
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66259
Received: 09/06/2014
Respondent: Miss Ruth Buckley
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Para 5.59.3 identifies an area to the north for a park and ride site. As most additional development will be to the south any park and ride to the north would increase traffic. The sites identified include green belt land, no special cicumstances have been demonstrated to justify development. Not opposed to to principle of park and ride provided it is located to the south and a brownfield site. However questions viability since both Leamington and Warwick town centres have plenty of car parks and many retail facilities are located outside the town centre.
See attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66265
Received: 03/06/2014
Respondent: Mr Jerry McDonagh
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Strongly object to any park and ride schemes that would impinge on the green belt land north of Leamington. The search areas highlighted would be useless and if the scheme went ahead and was proven t be a failure the green belt land would have the potential to be developed
See attached
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66438
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Warwickshire County Council [Archaeological Information and Advice]
Warwickshire County Council (WCC) considers that the approach that Warwick District Council (WDC) has taken to the delivery of park and ride facilities through the Local Plan Publication Draft consultation document is justifiable.It is noted that the Stage 3 STA raised concerns over the feasibility of a park and ride facility to the south of Warwick and that more testing would be needed. The Stage 4 STA identified that further work had been commissioned to review the case for a park and ride facility. Therefore the approach taken in the Local Plan to identify broad areas of search for a park and ride facility to the south of Gallows Hill / Harbury Lane, which have potential to accommodate a park and ride facility, should one be deemed appropriate, desirable, viable and feasible (as referred to in paragraph 5.59.3 of the Local Plan Publication Draft), but which should not compromise the ability to plan and bring forward development in the preferred development allocation locations to the south of Warwick and Leamington, is considered to be a reasonable approach.
See attached Representations.
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66545
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Friends of the Earth
Number of people: 4
We support the proposal that the southern Park and Ride will serve both Warwick and Leamington. However we suggest that the detailed design will be very important, so that the facility does not have a major effect on the openness of the countryside, and should not include floodlighting (see also below).
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66547
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Friends of the Earth
Number of people: 4
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The proposed northern park and ride could be more controversial - there are very few, if any, locations where it would not have a serious impact on the landscape quality of the area.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66556
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: CPRE WARWICKSHIRE
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The 'areas of search for Park & Ride' should be deleted from TR5 and from the Proposals Map. The P&R proposal is not justified and would not be effective. The safeguarding of large areas around Blackdown and Greys Mallory roundabouts, and west of Europa Way, would blight countryside at sensitive locations.
The justification offered is weak. The proposal to safeguard land around Grays Mallory roundabout was included in the previous Local Plan. This was for the then 'SPRINT' park & ride proposal of Warwickshire County Council, which was not found to be justified, and was abandoned. If the land is safeguarded, the area shown should exclude land east of Europa Way.
TR5 should have added to it safeguarding of a northern, town-centre side access to Leamington Spa Railway Station. The area shown on the Proposals Map east of housing allocation H10 (former Avenue Road station and current bus garage site) is not shown as safeguarded for this direct foot access from the town centre. That new access is shown in the Supplementary Planning Guidance adopted for the station area, but there has been no implementation.
see attached
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66706
Received: 27/06/2014
Respondent: Barwood Strategic Land II Limited
Agent: HOW Planning LLP
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Asps application proposals allocate in the region of 2 hectares of land for a
strategic Park and Ride with the capacity to accommodate up to 750 car parking
spaces, ideally located for traffic heading to Warwick and Leamington Spa. The
Asps presents the only deliverable option for a Park and Ride site, due to the comprehensively designed development which has fully considered how the Park
and Ride site will work in practice and a willing landowner.
The delivery of a Park and Ride facility on this site, as part of the development of
a comprehensive sustainable urban extension, is the only way in which the
Council's long-standing ambition to see such a facility provided in the District can
be delivered.
See attachment
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 66805
Received: 26/06/2014
Respondent: Gallagher Estates
Agent: Pegasus Group
It is noted that the Proposals Map defines, in broad terms, an area of search for a park and ride to the south of Warwick. The proposed development at Lower Heathcote Farm (part of South of Harbury Lane strategic site) and the Omission Site proposal at South of Gallows Hill / West of Europa Way do not prevent the park and ride being delivered in the future. This is consistent with Policy TR5.
see attached.