I just wanted to lodge my complaint about the vast number of houses that you are proposing to build. Already the road from Leek Wootton to Warwick in the mornings is at a standstill from 7.50am onwards. With the increased traffic that will be caused by the houses that are going to be built travelling to work for many people will be even worse. I appreciate that a new road is going to be built to join the A46 at Leek Wootton but there is still going to be the traffic from the north woodloes area and Leek Wootton that you haven't taken into account and made provision for.

Leek Wootton is a beautiful village with a community feel that already suffers from noise pollution from the current A46. Carving another road through Hill Wootton/Leek Wootton will spoil a beautiful village. Not to mention the impact further housing will have on the village.

We wish to register our objection to the New Local Plan for the following reasons:

1. The development of housing and associated infrastructure planned for the precious green belt land to the north of the town and the construction of a new link road from the A452 to the A46 through Old Milverton, when better alternatives exist involving less cost to the environment and most probably also in monetary terms.
2. We accept that new housing is needed in the district though the estimates of the numbers required look well in excess of reality. We think it would be a tragedy for future generations if Green Belt land is lost when other good alternatives exist such as:
a) Land between Whitnash and Radford Semele and South of Leamington towards Bishop's Tachbrook
b) Hatton where good rail and road access already exists
3. The development does not appear to cater sufficiently for pedestrians and cyclists.

The plan gives the impression that it was started from the premise of taking the Green Belt land and all the verbiage in the plan then sets about trying to justify it.

We very much hope there will be a fundamental re-think before lasting damage is done to our local heritage, which future generations will deplore.

I am writing on behalf of my husband and myself to say that we are against the proposed route through Abbey Fields. I think it will be a risk for children playing in the area and for people walking there. Cyclists quite often come up behind you when you are unaware of them and accidents can be the result, especially dangerous between the play area and the shop selling ice creams etc.
I hope this will be reconsidered.

Objects to the idea of a cycle path through the fields. I have spoken to several other residents and they are also opposed to the idea, mainly because of danger to children playing in the area. Bikes have been banned in the past for good reason. I also think such a wide path will spoil the appearance of the Fields.

I am against the proposal for a cycleway through the Abbey Fields for many reasons. For the enjoyment of Abbey Fields, a 2.5 metre cycle path is not going to look attractive. It would be nice to leave the Abbey Fields looking pretty and not least there are very good roads that surround the Abbey Fields that cyclists can use.

But mostly because as a child, (I am Kenilworth born and bred and so are my parents) we were not allowed to cycle through the Abbey Fields for many good reasons.

It tended to upset people when you came upon them almost silently and then whizzed past them, but mainly because dogs would chase us if we did.

The Abbey Fields is there for the people of Kenilworth to enjoy, not forever be looking over our shoulders to see if we or our off spring are just about to be sped over by a cyclist. I suspect the next proposal will be to keep dogs on leads, this point has been mooted many times and I for one think it would be a terrible shame if families with their pet dogs could no longer enjoy the fields as they were supposed to be enjoyed. We still have happy memories of our Golden Retriever copying our children as they rolled down the hill.

I remember there being a Byelaw which said 'no cyclists' personally I think this should stand. The cyclists have their roads, please let us keep our park.

Objects to the linking of the two ends of the long distance cycle route by permitting use of Abbey Fields. The short route from the public toilets incorporated into the Swimming Pool complex through to the beginning of the path to Forrest Road/Castle Road is tortuous, narrow, and heavily used by pedestrians, dogs and children. The human element is frequently concentrating on feeding or watching the wildfowl. Dogs are rarely on a short lead but restrained on a fairly long retractable lead. There is water (admittedly scarcely deep enough to cause drowning) very close, and the ground to it is inconsistent in nature, with grass, inclines, steps, wooden decking -- all of these providing a cyclist with no grip whatsoever when they are wet.

The bends are, for all practical purposes, considering the speed of a cycle, both blind and tight, especially those associated with the bridge.

A person or child coming quickly out of the toilet facilities could be knocked down by a bicycle unless made very conscious of the danger.

There is scarcely room for two people to walk abreast & pass a third. Any avoiding movement would have to be very prompt indeed when a cycle suddenly appeared. Many of the people using this valuable asset to health -- the Fields -- are elderly and not agile.

It takes only a few minutes at the site to realise just how absurd this proposal is. It's fine, I'm sure, when there is no-one around, but people using the cycle route will be wanting to do so just at the time when a lot of other people are also wanting to be on that corner in the Fields.

If it could be guaranteed that cyclists would dismount at the beginning of the children's play area, and not remount until they were on the main path to Castle Road, there might be some sense in the proposal, but, frankly, as we know, they will not dismount. Anyway, bicycles being wheeled round the north-west corner of the Swimming Pool complex are still a nuisance, like shopping trolleys and kiddies' tricycles. There just isn't room.

I fear that the relaxed atmosphere of the Fields, and particularly this corner of them, could be compromised for ever: all users would have to be on constant alert. It would be a huge loss.

If, nonetheless, the proposal is approved, then the Council should arrange for an ambulance to be stationed permanently by the Baths

Scanned Response Form

Scanned Response Form

I am writing to express my concern with the proposed plan to develop on the Green Belt Land in Blackdown and Old Milverton. I believe that all brown and white field sites must be exhausted before this land is considered for development. Its value as agricultural land and recreational use appear to be underestimated.

I would also like express disappointment at the lack of emphasis for an improvement in the cycle network throughout the district.

scanned submission

I wish to raise a number of points about the recently published proposals in the new local plan.

There are a number of local villages mentioned in which you propose to allow development of new houses, but I do not think you have enough villages on your list. I note that Ashow, Bagington, Bubbenhall, Hill Wootton, Offchurch, Stoneleigh or Stareton are not mentioned and even my own village of Old Milverton is not on the list.

There are local areas for future employment growth like Stoneleigh Park, University of Warwick and Coventry Airport all close by so surely it makes sense to distribute new housing around the district rather than concentrate it all in a couple of areas. This would even stimulate local community life and steer away from the trend of dormitory villages for wealthier individuals.
Any increase in road traffic would be spread far more evenly, rather than concentrated at one or two pressure points.
I have spoken to a few people in my own village who would welcome some new houses as the increase in population would lead to a more vibrant community life.

On a different matter I wish to raise my concern about the proposed Northern Relief Road.

Are you aware that the proposed route will cross the River Avon flood plain at a particularly wide point ?
This area has been known to flood at least three times a year and the wildlife corridor which has been established along the Southern side of the River Avon where the proposed route will cross will be decimated.

I want to register my objection to the development plan for housing in North Leamington and Blackdown and the plan to build roads through Old Milverton.

We have lived here for the last 17 years and moved here from Birmingham. One of the reasons for enjoying where we live in Leamington is the ease with which we can access green belt land from our doorstep without having to get in the car and add to congestion and polution. When friends visit us they often comment on how lucky we are to enjoy walking access to great shops in Leamington whilst also being able to walk and cycle from our doorstep into countyside.

Your proposal for North Leamington housing and road building will seriously interfere with my enjoyment of the amenity of my immediate environment. I will lose the ability to do my regular walks up towards Old Milverton, past the allotments on the right and then right across fields eventually coming out on Northumberland Road. I also walk down to the Saxon Mill and then come back up via the church at Old Milverton. Your road building will change this environment moving it from rural to urban, reduce my enjoyment of my area and build on green belt when you do have alternatives.

In addition to enjoying walking out from my home I also cycle to work on the Warwick University campus. I use the cycle plath past the Saxon Mill ( thank you for making this) and then up into Leek Wooton , Kenilworth and on to the Uni. If you travel this route you will see that I get access to a great deal of variety ; there are distinct diffferences between the Saxon Mil part of Warwick , Leek and Hill Wotton, Kenilworth - your plans will result in a coalesance of these urban areas. That is such a shame , it really is a prize worth holding onto to be able to live in a district that has such a variety of localities with their own personailitie . You run the risk of being the group of elected Members and Officers who destroyed the difference between these adjoining localities and created one large urban blob. Just what I left behind in Birmingham.

So , I would ask you to note my objection to the local plan to develop housing in North Leamington and Blackdown and road construction in Milverton on the grounds it will reduce my enjoyment of the local area for recreation and make it harder for me to access open green space for walking and cycling . I also object on the grounds of loss of enjoyment because it will result in coalescence of urban areas

A cycle path right through middle of Abbey Fields is a dangerous idea. This area is used greatly by parents and young children and other pedestrians. The only suitable way would to have a cycle route right round boundary fence by Rosemary Hill, Abbey Hill and Forrest Hill. There would then need to be a very strict policy of no cycling anywhere else in Abbey Fields.
Christine MacDonald Clinton Lane.

We have lived in Northumberland Road in Leamington Spa for 36 years and strongly object to the use of greenbelt land for housing development.
Since moving to Northumberland Road there have been two developments of houses in the road which has considerably increased traffic and spoilt the amenities of the fields and countryside close by.

We regularly walk in the fields and pathways at the back of Northumberland Road and it is a very pleasant and worthwhile amenity for the people of Leamington.

If development takes place in Blackdown, how long would it be before the Council are reaching out to join up with Kenilworth and Leamington will loose itss identity.

We have heard about the comments re 'not in our back yard' but why does greenbelt land have to be use when there is plenty of other land in Leamington suitable for development and WDC does not demonstrate the exceptional circumstances necessary to build on greenbelt as set out by the NPPF.

The North Leamington Relief Road would certainly not ease traffic in Northumberland Road and would totally spoil the beautiful countryside surrounding Old Milverton.

See attachment

Can you please explain the logic in the proposed road through Old Milverton to the A46. Is this purely to get residents of the proposed new development to the north of Leamington to the business parks and proposed new offices at the south of the town? If you think this would work then why are there currently so many vehicles coming from Kenilworth and the north and also off the A46 and travelling into and through Leamington rather than travelling on the A46 and round to the south of the town that way? Surely people will always want to take the most direct route? If the plan is to get residents from the planned new buildings to the A46 and away from Leamington then what is wrong with the Kenilworth Road north to the A46? If it is the volume of traffic then would it not make more sense to convert it to a dual carriageway rather than scarring the green belt with a new road and ruining a lovely village?

Please, please can there be provision for any traffic improvements to include cycle paths and sensible long routes rather than short bits here and there.

My son works on the business park off Gallows Hill and there a many companies that offer a 'buy a cycle' scheme to encourage staff to cycle to work. However many of the staff will not take it up becauce of the nightmare of cycling down Europa Way. There is plenty of space on either side of Europe Way for a cycle lane so surely it would be money well spent to build one.

Bike sales are rising - why not encourage it. More and more people want to cycle please make it safe for them to do so and get the trend going in the right direction.

I wish to strongly object to the New Local Plan being proposed in Old Milverton and Blackdown.

Firstly, Green Belt Land is irreplaceable, when lost, it has gone forever! We are a small island and all Green Belt land Land is precious and we must fight for every inch!
The NPPF states that Green belt Land is there to prevent towns merging and to protect the countryside from encroachment. We have some beautiful greenbelt land in this area and everything must be done to avoid destroying this land.
A huge amount of wild life and their habitats would also be destroyed.
In 2009 a Core Strategy was identified and is still available for development with a certain amount of infrastructure, including access to the M40 already in place, so why is it necessary to demolish other areas, including GreenBelt Land?
In Blackdown there are a tremendous amount of people who enjoy activities in this area by cycling, walking and running, not to mention the people who ride horses in this area, all this would be lost should your plans go ahead.
Agricultural land would also be badly hit in Blackdown and Old Milverton, there already plans afoot to develop Stonleigh Agricultural Centre, so why are more employment facilities needed?
Your plans for a dual carriageway on the A452 from Kenilworth to Leamington are unnecessary, the road is busy in the rush hour but after that traffic is normal. The continuation of the dual carriageway into Stonleigh Road and down through Old Milverton would destroy the area completely.
By building a dual carriageway you would be encouraging more traffic to use the road and where would the cars end up? I think Kenilworth and Leamington would be swamped with traffic!
The dual carriageway would greatly change the appearance between Kenilworth and Leamington by removing all the hedgerows and greenery and turning the area into concrete. Who will be paying for this road to be constructed?
I question the need for the large amount of housing proposed for North Leamington, the building of thousands of new homes would only increase the congestion and totally change the beauty of the area.
Proposed housing at Lowes Farm would be a travesty and again, unnecessary, when other land is already earmarked in south Leamington as being suitable for housing.

2:2 - Why is the environment not listed as a key priority: without it, all manner of planning applications can be granted which are anti-environmental

Is leisure included in "Health and Wellbeing". If so, this should be made clear.

2:5 - As there is no way the economy can be predicted, there should be a commitment to responding to new opportunities and needs which arise

Can the areas mentioned as requiring regeneration be identified?

I am concerned about the second bullet point under Emphasis on infrastructure, as most areas of the countryside and of importance for wildlife need only a very light touch, if a touch at all. There should be a clear distinction between the approach to parks and managed open spaces, and to wilder areas (e.g. Welch's Meadow would be ruined by heavy handed management).

3:7 - there are elements referred to in this draft plan which need to be prioritised and policy made before March/April 2012; in particular a policy on the concentration of HMOs.

4:6 - the protection afforded to conservation areas should be strengthened, particularly as these cover apparently only 4% of the district

4:8, point 2 - It should be noted that one major contributory factor to the current lack of affordable properties relates to HMOs. The house next door to mine is an example of this. It was owned by an elderly lady who went into residential care. There was a large amount of interest in the property from people who wanted it as a family home, indeed so much interest that it was decided on sealed bids. Because the property needed some updating, and I met several potential purchasers who wanted to restore it to its former self, the highest bidder was, almost inevitably, a landlord who could easily find the finance and would easily recoup the investment by turning it into an HMO. I have seen this repeated time and again in my area of south Leamington where the gains from HMOs has pushed up prices beyond affordable for an individual or family: indeed a local couple I know has not been able to find an affordable small period house and, despite wanting to stay in Leamington, is having to move to Cheltenham to find such a property. In addition to the price problem, most often the conversion to HMO is the cheapest possible and degrades the period property.

4:10.2 - It is right to accommodate university students, but not at the expense of other "settled" residents. South Leamington is at a tipping point where the area could be completely dominated by students The advantages of a large student population tend to benefit the few - landlords and places selling cheap food and drink, whilst the cost and disadvantages are picked up by Council tax payers and local neighbours. It also means that businesses not directed at students tend to stay away. One south town resident recently pointed out that because Leamington is only a student dormitory town rather than a university town, we have generally ended up with all of the problems of a large student population and none of the advantages of the university culture which takes place on campus. I can see no reason why special consideration should be afforded to the University of Warwick in providing accommodation for its students.

4:11 - I agree with all these points, particularly endorsing numbers 7, 9 and 10. It is particularly important in any development not to let the developer be the tail which wags the dog, as the developer will inevitably want to take the easiest and cheapest route in contradiction to the area's best interests.

5-7 - Level of growth:
As forecasting population growth is a very inexact science, the Council should constantly monitor what is actually happening. If the expected population growth is not materialising, planned development should be scaled back accordingly. It makes sense therefore to insist on development of the brownfield sites before eating into Green Belt.

P04:D - Loss of green space should also be taken into account when assessing development of garden land. This space may not be directly accessible to the general public, but if it contributes to the overall feeling of green space which is enjoyed by the general public (e.g. with trees that can be seen from neighbouring streets), it is very important that it is maintained. It is also important for biodiversity and the environment, as gardens are now understood to be extremely important habitats for wildlife.

P06.D - It is most important to identify the locational criteria and to carry out a thorough survey of all HMOs and their residents, not just those which have previously had to get Council approval.

7.59 - We need this policy now!

P08 - We also need a firm policy now regarding the protection of existing employment buildings from change of use, as in my area I can think of several schemes either applyng for or already granted planning permission to change from commercial to residential use. The Plan already points out that f the area population is going to increase, then employment will need to increase as well and it is short-sighted to be allowing commercial property to disappear.

8:21 - Does the projection of additional job requirement take into account that the growth in the older population will automatically mean the release of the jobs these people were doing?

9: Retailing

It is a mistake to be led by the retail "experts" who push for constant retail development schemes in order to compete with neighbouring towns. There is a fine balance between having enough "High Street names" to serve shoppers and having so many that Leamington becomes indistinguishable from any other shopping centre - in which case, why would any non-residents want to come here? The success of the last major retail development - which seems dubious to me - (Parade to Regent Street) should be assessed before rushing into another similar development. Outside shoppers will travel to a shopping centre to find something different and it is this difference which needs to be identified and promoted. These major developments also seem to push up rents for retailers.

13: Inclusive, Safe and Healthy Communities

Developments should not be permitted which will downgrade and produce associated problems to an area, e.g. SEVs.

14: Transport

I suggest WDC promote a car sharing scheme.

P014: How can you plan a retail development in Chandos Street whilst aiming to maintain sufficient parking in town centres. Chandos Street is a much more popular car park than the multi-storeys.

15: Green Infrastructure

A relevant issue is that Network Rail is destroying, and has been for a long time, the natural environment and wildlife habitat along railway lines by felling all the trees and killing undergrowth every year with weed killer.

15:14 - Yes to urban tree planting; concern about messing with the River Leam borders unless already in a well-used managed area.

P017 - I agree with the continued support for the development of a cultural quarter

I believe that existing visitor accommodation should be protected from change of use.

18: Flooding

Planning permission should be sought by someone wanting to pave/concrete over a front garden, as I believe this trend has contributed to flooding problems.

Summary of major concerns

* Restrictions needed on HMOs
* Light-handed touch needed on non-parkland open spaces and riverside
* More creative study of retail demands and opportunities needed
* Although the Plan does seem to recognise this, the expansion of the district must avoid segregating areas into a single use, e.g. residential, employment, etc. Areas are much more interesting and attractive if they include a mix of residential, employment, cultural/leisure, etc. properties.

Strategic Viison
Centro welcomes the overall spatial vision or the district and especially the identification of transport as an important issue. Centro in particular welcomes the emphasis of delivering a sustainable transport package as one of the key principles within the Local Plan.
Centro welcomes that improving access to sustainable means of transport is a key strategic objective running through the document. Warwick DC should ensure that new proposals must be consistent and follow the principles established within the Warwickshire Local Transport Plan with the aim of improving modal share for sustainable means of transport.
The need to continue to invest in public transport across the district is welcomed as well as the recognition that strategic land use decisions can affect lifestyle choices and lead to long term improvements in health amongst local communities.
We also consider that there are a number of policy documents serving the West Midlands Metropolitan Area that should be considered whilst developing the Local Plan.
1. West Midlands Local Transport Plan
The West Midlands Local Transport Plan 2011 - 2026 (LTP) is a statutory document which looks at the transport needs of the Metropolitan Area and sets out a way forward to deliver those needs through short, medium and long term transport solutions.
The LTP has town parts:
The Local Transport Strategy - covering the 15 year period 2011 - 2026
The Implementation Plan - which details how we will deliver the first five years of the strategy (2011 - 2016)
2. Centro Integrated Public Transport Prospectus (IPTP)
The Integrated Public Transport Prospectus outlines a vision for a prosperous, healthy inculsive and sustainable West Midlands, served by a world class public transport system. The IPTP is currently being revised by Centro with the intention of a public consultation draft available from January 2013.
3. West Midlands Rail Vision
The West Midlands Rail Vision provides the region with a strategic focus for existing passenger and freight services and future rail development that will serve the West Midlands Region. This is currently being revised by the Regional Rail Forum.
HS"
Centro is disappointed that the Local Plan opposes the preferred route for the proposed High Speed Rail Line between London and Birmingham that will pass through the district boundary.
Centro believes that through the Local Plan Warwick District Council should consider and address the strategic importance of the proposed High Speed 2 Interchange station at Birmingham Airport. Whilst recognising that High Speed Rail servies will not be commencing before 2025, the station is expected to act as a catalyst for economic development and its proximity to Warwick District Council can benefit from the improved accessibility that HS2 will bring.
Rail
The recent High Level Output Specification Programme announcement made by the Department for Transport will enable the electrification of existing rail lines that will improve accessibility and reliability of rail services.
The routes to be electrified as part of the Electric Spine and other previous agreed projects include the Southampton Port - Basingstoke - Reading - Oxford - Leamington - Coventry.
This will allow operation of electric freight and longer distance passenger trains over this route. It would also enable the proposed NUCKLE Phase 2 service to be electrically operated and linked into other local services on teh Birmingham - Coventry corridor increasing through journey opportunities and connectivity to Birmingham, Birmingham International, NEC and HS2 Interchange from Leamington and Kenilworth.
It is expected that these improvements will be made during either Control Period 5 (2014 - 2019) or Control Period (2019 - 2024) both of which will occur during the Local Plan's lifespan. Centro strongly encourages Warwick DC to integrate the line and service improvements into the evolving Local Plan.
Bus
Centro would like to see greater reference within the core strategy to the role of buses in making cross boundary journeys into the West Moiands Metropolitan Area. Centro's adopted Integrated Public Transport Prospectus idnetifies the importance of the 'Journey to Work' area bus services between metropolitan West Midlands and major centres within the Warwick DC. Continued support and promotion of these services will help to reduce the use of the private car whilst encouraging sustainable travel options.
For further information on the Integrated Public Transport Prospectus, please see P40 in the link below: www.centro.org.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.aspx?ID=5362
Centro stresses that a high quality public transport network can assist in sustainable economic growth and regeneration, whilst also ensuring that the West Midlands transport sector contributes to the wider challenges including reducing climate-changing emissions. It is essential that investment into the provision of high quality public transport facilities and services to serve new and existing development is made from the outset in order to encourage use of more sustainable modes.

Strategic Viison
Centro welcomes the overall spatial vision or the district and especially the identification of transport as an important issue. Centro in particular welcomes the emphasis of delivering a sustainable transport package as one of the key principles within the Local Plan.
Centro welcomes that improving access to sustainable means of transport is a key strategic objective running through the document. Warwick DC should ensure that new proposals must be consistent and follow the principles established within the Warwickshire Local Transport Plan with the aim of improving modal share for sustainable means of transport.
The need to continue to invest in public transport across the district is welcomed as well as the recognition that strategic land use decisions can affect lifestyle choices and lead to long term improvements in health amongst local communities.
We also consider that there are a number of policy documents serving the West Midlands Metropolitan Area that should be considered whilst developing the Local Plan.
1. West Midlands Local Transport Plan
The West Midlands Local Transport Plan 2011 - 2026 (LTP) is a statutory document which looks at the transport needs of the Metropolitan Area and sets out a way forward to deliver those needs through short, medium and long term transport solutions.
The LTP has town parts:
The Local Transport Strategy - covering the 15 year period 2011 - 2026
The Implementation Plan - which details how we will deliver the first five years of the strategy (2011 - 2016)
2. Centro Integrated Public Transport Prospectus (IPTP)
The Integrated Public Transport Prospectus outlines a vision for a prosperous, healthy inculsive and sustainable West Midlands, served by a world class public transport system. The IPTP is currently being revised by Centro with the intention of a public consultation draft available from January 2013.
3. West Midlands Rail Vision
The West Midlands Rail Vision provides the region with a strategic focus for existing passenger and freight services and future rail development that will serve the West Midlands Region. This is currently being revised by the Regional Rail Forum.
HS"
Centro is disappointed that the Local Plan opposes the preferred route for the proposed High Speed Rail Line between London and Birmingham that will pass through the district boundary.
Centro believes that through the Local Plan Warwick District Council should consider and address the strategic importance of the proposed High Speed 2 Interchange station at Birmingham Airport. Whilst recognising that High Speed Rail servies will not be commencing before 2025, the station is expected to act as a catalyst for economic development and its proximity to Warwick District Council can benefit from the improved accessibility that HS2 will bring.
Rail
The recent High Level Output Specification Programme announcement made by the Department for Transport will enable the electrification of existing rail lines that will improve accessibility and reliability of rail services.
The routes to be electrified as part of the Electric Spine and other previous agreed projects include the Southampton Port - Basingstoke - Reading - Oxford - Leamington - Coventry.
This will allow operation of electric freight and longer distance passenger trains over this route. It would also enable the proposed NUCKLE Phase 2 service to be electrically operated and linked into other local services on teh Birmingham - Coventry corridor increasing through journey opportunities and connectivity to Birmingham, Birmingham International, NEC and HS2 Interchange from Leamington and Kenilworth.
It is expected that these improvements will be made during either Control Period 5 (2014 - 2019) or Control Period (2019 - 2024) both of which will occur during the Local Plan's lifespan. Centro strongly encourages Warwick DC to integrate the line and service improvements into the evolving Local Plan.
Bus
Centro would like to see greater reference within the core strategy to the role of buses in making cross boundary journeys into the West Moiands Metropolitan Area. Centro's adopted Integrated Public Transport Prospectus idnetifies the importance of the 'Journey to Work' area bus services between metropolitan West Midlands and major centres within the Warwick DC. Continued support and promotion of these services will help to reduce the use of the private car whilst encouraging sustainable travel options.
For further information on the Integrated Public Transport Prospectus, please see P40 in the link below: www.centro.org.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.aspx?ID=5362
Centro stresses that a high quality public transport network can assist in sustainable economic growth and regeneration, whilst also ensuring that the West Midlands transport sector contributes to the wider challenges including reducing climate-changing emissions. It is essential that investment into the provision of high quality public transport facilities and services to serve new and existing development is made from the outset in order to encourage use of more sustainable modes.

Scanned document

Scanned document

Document scanned

Document scanned.

Document scanned.

Document scanned.

Document scanned.

Document Scanned

Document scanned.

Document scanned