CPRE West Midlands believe a healthy economy is a key element of
Sustainable Development in the region, but we want to see that achieved
through appropriate urban and rural regeneration. In particular
we do not believe the large scale swallowing up of the countryside
is the right way to further the economic prospects of the region,
and we, along with our county branches, have opposed industrial
developments which harms the beauty and tranquillity of the countryside.
That doesn't mean we don't want healthy rural economy, but often
that is best achieved through small scale developments, not large
intrusive factories.
Advantage
West Midlands has a Regional Economic Strategy which sets out goals
for the region and a series of Agendas for Action have followed.
The Economic Strategy has been under review and a revised version
was published in January 2004 available via www.advantagewm.co.uk/wmes
The
goals are also reflected in the wider policies of Draft Regional
Planning Guidance. The six most significant in planning terms are
listed below:
|
| Regeneration
Zones |
Five Urban zones, three in the central conurbation, one in Coventry
and Nuneaton, one in Stoke. We strongly support policies aimed at
regeneration and modernising these areas. One Rural Regeneration Zone
covering large areas of Herefordshire and Shropshire centred on the
A49. We agree that there is a need for appropriate rural regeneration
but this is the most tranquil area of the region and is valued by
local and visitors alike. Rural regeneration must be appropriate to
the area and centre on existing towns and villages.
|
| High
Technology Corridors |
Three High Technology Corridors stretching out from the central
conurbation into the countryside: Wolverhampton-Telford, A38 South
to Malvern and Solihull, Coventry, Birmingham centred on the M42.
We support the concept of High Technology Corridors which concentrate
on delivering a specific modern economic need, however we want strong
policy protection for the countryside.
We
argued at the RPG Examination that development should be strongly
geared to existing urban areas and 'nodal' in character. There should
be no ribbon development and that there needed to be a tough regime
to ensure land is released for genuine High Technology purposes
and not whittled away on general industrial development, eating
up countryside and undermining the purpose of the corridors.
We
were glad to see support for this in the recent modifications but
it now depends on both the Government Office and Advantage West
Midlands to police the concept. The proposal for an Ikea store at
Longbridge in the heart of one of the corridors may be an early
test of whether there is the will to ensure the corridors are enforceable.
|
| The
A49 |
The A49 is identified as a transport corridor in the Rural Regeneration
Zone in the Regional Planning Guidance, but the final RPG acknoledges
this is an environmental sensitive route and that other transport
initiatives will be needed if the Regeneration Zone is not to simply
bring ribbon development along that route. We will be monitoring situation
to ensure countryside assets are properly protected.
|
| Major
Investment Sites |
Over 50 hectares single user sites. Aimed at big multi-national users.
Currently proposed sites: Ansty, Peddimore, Wobaston Road. Proposed
further site near Stoke. CPRE West Midlands opposes the site at Peddimore,
which is in Green Belt, and argues that other more sustainable sites
will not be developed while it is on the books. Our view was accepted
by the Independent Inspector at the Birmingham Unitary Development
Plan Inquiry and we are now pressing for it to be accepted by the
Council. MIS's should not be used for smaller development once they've
been identified.
|
| Regional
Investment Sites |
Up to 50 hectares business parks for mixed industrial sites. Include
Birmingham Business Park and Blythe Valley. New proposals include
Bassetts Pole on the M6 Toll (BNRR). Regional Planning Guidance says
one RIS should be available for each Regeneration Zone and High Technology
Corridor, although one RIS might be shared by two or more zones/corridors.
We have opposed these in Green Belt, for example at Bassetts Pole
which was also rejected by the Inspector at Birmingham's UDP. We have
also argued that more should be developed on urban brown field sites.
We do not believe a large number need be identified now because the
uptake historically has been slow and new brown field sites coming
forward should not be hindered by an excessive number of half full
green field sites.
|
| Regional
Logistics Sites |
At least 50 hectare warehousing, which would in reality serve mainly
as national hubs. There are a host of these in the East Midlands
and there is huge pressure for more of them in the West Midlands.
In the last five years such sites have tripled nationally and the
industry would like much bigger sites, from 100 to 200 hectares,
usually in open countryside at large road junctions. We are strongly
opposed to a plethora of such facilities becoming a blot on the
rural landscape. We do not believe larger warehousing is necessarily
good for the overall economy, and it certainly leads to overall
job losses as companies close down local facilities. Large warehouse
parks also tend to increase the overall level of traffic as lorries
travel further. The open-ended draft Regional Planning Guidance
policy on Logistics Sites was totally unacceptable to us. It identified
five key locations where it says Brown Field sites should come forward
even though local authorities say they haven't got them and in cases
like Rugby want to diversify away from warehousing. The Panel has
reduced that to two, North Staffordshire and Telford. This is a
welcome first step but we will continue to monitor an issue which
is a very immediate threat to the countryside.
|
Click here to read CPRE West Midlands Responce to AWM's "Economic
Strategy Review"
|
