Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Question 29 - Infrastructure Requirements at Meriden
Any development within the village is an opportunity for the settlement to play its part in accommodating its own needs.
Local Housing Need – Site 10 in the Draft Local Plan (DLP) 2016 located to the west of Meriden Village (between Birmingham Road and Maxstoke Lane) would provide affordable/special needs housing and possible refurbishment of the existing Firs development. Further survey/assessment will indicate what provision is necessary. Extra guidance will also be available in the emerging Meriden Neighbourhood Plan and Solihull Council is working with the Parish Council and the community to bring forward the Plan for adoption.
Concept Master Plan – The plans that accompany this consultation include a draft concept master plan for Site 10 of the DLP (2016). This indicates the overall site could accommodate around 100 dwellings with an area of public open space provided around the existing pond in the centre of the site. The Masterplan sets out the opportunities for the site to create a gateway development into Meriden.
Local Infrastructure Requirements – The settlement has a good provision of local services to meet local needs. However, any development would need to include assessment of this infrastructure. In particular of school capacity and local medical facilities.
Local Aspirations – The emerging Meriden Neighbourhood Plan will set out the current aspirations of local people for the future of the settlement. Comments on the Draft Local plan highlight the Parish Council's desire to maintain Green Belt and rural communities, have improvements to public transport and infrastructure (particularly with the developments associated with the HS2 Interchange Station), reduce air pollution and increased provision of smaller homes for the elderly and affordable homes. Local aspirations can also be evidenced in the Meriden Parish Plan (2009), Meriden Parish Design Statement (2011), Meriden Parish Council's straw poll results to the Call for Sites, Meriden Neighbourhood Plan Survey 2016.
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – Presently the parish council will directly receive 15% of the levy collected in the area. This will increase to 25% once any Neighbourhood Plans are adopted. This will provide a significant source of funding that can be used to take forward appropriate projects that the community have identified as priorities. This can include simple relatively low cost actions (e.g. further traffic regulation orders) through to more substantial projects. It will be for the parish council to decide how this 'local' element of the CIL receipts is to be spent and there is potential for partnership working to maximise the use of monies from this source.
Green Belt Enhancements – The revised NPPF makes provision for environmental and/or access improvements to be undertaken to land that is to remain in the Green Belt to compensate for land that is taken up for development. This provides an opportunity for enhancements to existing or additional open space and other enhancements as needed.
29 Do you agree with the infrastructure requirements identified for Meriden, if not why not; or do you believe there are any other matters that should be included?
Question 30 - Site 10 - West of Meriden
Site 10 West of Meriden (between Birmingham Road and Maxstoke Lane) (Capacity 100)
This site relates to land currently bounded by Maxstoke Lane (both the original section and that that has been realigned) and Birmingham Road. It is located opposite frontage development that already occurs along Birmingham Road and would, at least in part, be rounding off development off Maxstoke Lane.
The site is in an accessible position with regard to the centre of the village. The Birmingham frontage part of the site is located within a Green Belt parcel that has been assessed as making no contribution towards the purposes of including land in the Green Belt, and that part of the site to the rear is in an area that makes a low contribution.
30 Do you believe that Site 10 west of Meriden should be included as allocated site, if not why not? Do you have any comments on the draft concept masterplan for the site?