Agenda item

Margaret Smith introduced the report highlighting the good response rate and key issues. She also emphasised that financial implications of the programmes mentioned in the report were not yet known and funding had not been identified.

Councillor Holland welcomed the report particularly the news that lifts were to be installed at Warwick Station. The works needed at the station required some additional funding to join the County Council provided cycle route to the Network Rail provided scheme and he asked Cabinet to be mindful of this cost when considering the budget. He also stated that the level of demand for rail travel would be largely determined by the district and borough council’s local plans which set out how many new houses would be built and where. It was thus important for the County Council to gain a clear understanding of housing allocations in the local plans.

The Chair responded that officers had been asked to prepare a briefing note on development that had been identified through local plans after the last Chair and Spokesperson meeting.

Councillor Kondakor stated that he was disappointed by the lack of young people responding to the consultation and by the lack of a response form Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council and the Nuneaton Rail Users Forum.

Margaret Smith responded that the report only listed organisations that had responded by writing and she confirmed that Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council had responded online.

Councillor Kondakor noted the Nuneaton Parkway Station on the A5 mentioned in the report. He stated that this station would not have any public transport links and he felt that there was not a lot of demand locally for the station.

Margaret Smith responded that the Council aimed to provide a mix of stations to balance existing travel demands with services to the centre of communities. She stated that transport planners took a wider corridor approach to travel and that a station on the A5 would help to intercept existing car journeys and encourage modal shift as Stratford Parkway had done in the south of the County.

Councillor Kondakor stated that he would welcome a review of the placement of the parkway station and that a station on Eastboro Way seemed to be a better option. He also stated that there was a risk of parkway stations reducing services to town centre stations.

In response to Councillor Chilvers, Margaret Smith stated that she wanted to manage expectations around a potential Warwick University Station. While the Council did have an aspiration to bring forward a new station early feasibility work had shown that significant investment in rail infrastructure would be required in order to provide a level of service that would attract rail users.

Councillor Pandher noted the low level of response from BAME communities and asked officers how the consultation had been advertised and if officers knew why it had not elicited more of a response.

Margaret Smith responded that the consultation had been mainly carried out online through the council’s consultation portal and advertised through Council mailing lists that residents could sign up to. The consultation had also been sent to a standard list of stakeholders. Margarete Smith stated that she would relay Councillor Pandher’s concerns to the council’s consultation team.

Councillor Pandher stated that he would welcome a review of how the Council consulted residents to ensure that all residents were able to respond.