Question 29 - Infrastructure Requirements at Meriden

Showing comments and forms 1 to 16 of 16

Support

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 6807

Received: 24/02/2019

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Bridge

Representation Summary:

Ok

Full text:

Ok

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 7616

Received: 12/03/2019

Respondent: Mrs Lynn Parker

Representation Summary:

The access/egress via Maxstoke Lane to this site is totally unacceptable. The Lane is narrow as stated in SMBC site analysis, and already carries all traffic from Maxstoke Lane, Maxstoke Close and recently completed Gate Estate. 100 houses will put even greater pressure on Doctors Surgery, Schools and traffic in the village. The number of homes should remain at 50 as we were originally told. The McCarthy and Stone development is not the type of development needed/wanted. And any development must have an equal spread of Privately Owned, Affordable/Rented houses across the whole site regardless of multiple land ownership.
,

Full text:

The access/egress via Maxstoke Lane to this site is totally unacceptable. The Lane is narrow as stated in SMBC site analysis, and already carries all traffic from Maxstoke Lane, Maxstoke Close and recently completed Gate Estate. 100 houses will put even greater pressure on Doctors Surgery, Schools and traffic in the village. The number of homes should remain at 50 as we were originally told. The McCarthy and Stone development is not the type of development needed/wanted. And any development must have an equal spread of Privately Owned, Affordable/Rented houses across the whole site regardless of multiple land ownership.
,

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 7780

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Mr Geoffrey Wheeler

Representation Summary:

I am dismayed that the "aspirations of the local people" as expressed in their emerging Neighbourhood Development Plan have been quoted as justification for allocating only 100 houses to Meriden. The aspirations of residents of Berkswell as expressed in their NDP - which has reached the stage of independant examination - have been ignored. The Local Plan takes no input from the Berkswell NDP.
There is also the possibility of a new settlement west of Meriden at Cornets End which has been discounted although it is possible that this area is identified in the Hearn report.

Full text:

I am dismayed that the "aspirations of the local people" as expressed in their emerging Neighbourhood Development Plan have been quoted as justification for allocating only 100 houses to Meriden. The aspirations of residents of Berkswell as expressed in their NDP - which has reached the stage of independant examination - have been ignored. The Local Plan takes no input from the Berkswell NDP.
There is also the possibility of a new settlement west of Meriden at Cornets End which has been discounted although it is possible that this area is identified in the Hearn report.

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 7839

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Mr J Davies

Representation Summary:

It seems logical that this area can sustain more development, instead of Shirley, for example, as it benefits from a more than adequate road network and could draw road use and services use away from the already crowded areas elsewhere in the plan.

Full text:

It seems logical that this area can be developed instead of Shirley, for example, as it would benefit from the more than adequate road network and draw road use and services use away from the already crowded areas elsewhere in the plan

Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 8096

Received: 14/03/2019

Respondent: Terra Strategic

Agent: Delta Planning

Representation Summary:

We disagree with the infrastructure requirements identified for Meriden and consider they should include provision for an expansion of the Primary School which is understood to be at capacity. This could be facilitated with the release of land north of Meriden between the existing settlement (and school) and the A45, including Site 81.

Full text:

We disagree with the infrastructure requirements identified for Meriden and consider they should include provision for an expansion of the Primary School which is understood to be at capacity. This could be facilitated with the release of land north of Meriden between the existing settlement (and school) and the A45, including Site 81.

Support

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 8975

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Meriden Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Following our consultation response in 2017, infrastructure issues remain: transport, traffic, schools, GP access, Post Office, banks.
Primary school is limited in space already and the GP surgery is at capacity.
Local transport facilities continue to dwindle, e.g. Ring and Ride
Continued quarry expansion will increase quarry lorry movements that presently stand at 732 PER DAY.
Further impacts need to be considered from possible HS2 Bridge across Meriden Road, Motorway Service Area, M42 junction 6, potential new developments in Hampton in Arden, Balsall Common and Eastern Green, all of which will increase traffic, noise, dust and pollution.
With increasing traffic, it is a must that a turning circle be installed possibly at Strawberry Fields junction.
With increased HGV use of Berkswell Road to commercial businesses sited in Berkswell, a pedestrian footpath should be installed between Heart of England Club and Berryfields.
Need to take account of emerging Meriden NDP and supporting evidence.

Full text:

We gratefully acknowledge that Solihull Council has considered our comments on your Draft Local Plan made back in 2017 and the evidence which features in the Meriden Parish Plan (2009), Meriden Parish Design Statement (2011), Meriden Parish Council's straw poll results to the Call for Sites and the Meriden Neighbourhood Plan Survey 2016. You should now also consider the results of our Housing Needs Survey published in 2018 and adopted by Meriden Parish Council in January 2019.

This encourages us to believe that you agree with our comments made in 2017 that infrastructure issues remain: transport, traffic, schools, GP access, Post Office, banks. The primary school is limited in space already and the GP surgery is at capacity and further residents in Meriden will add to that pressure. Access to social amenities within the community is a requirement for the growing older population, but local transport facilities continue to dwindle, loss of Taxi Bus Ring and Ride and the current potential threat to the 89 service/Blue Bus which replaced it.

Continued quarry expansion will increase quarry lorry movements that presently stand at 732 PER DAY.

These figures do not include the haulage routes to Mancetter Quarry North Warwickshire, use of Fillongley Road serving DeMulders, Brailes Farm and Heart of England Show Ground. Additional HGVs access Berkswell Road via the Village Centre to Home Farm Container Storage and Pettifors. All these additional road networks are not covered by the Meriden Quarry Routing Agreements.

Further threats to Meriden Gap and Green Belt comprise possible HS2 Bridge across Meriden Road, Motorway Service Area, M42 junction 6, potential new developments in Hampton in Arden, Balsall Common and Eastern Green, all of which will increase traffic, noise, dust and pollution.

With increasing traffic, it is a must that a turning circle be installed possibly at Strawberry Fields junction as there is no turning facility anywhere in the Village. With the increased HGV use of Berkswell Road to commercial businesses sited in Berkswell, a pedestrian footpath should be installed between Heart of England Club and Berryfields.

Support

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 8990

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Councillor Max McLoughlin

Representation Summary:

There is very limited provision for housing in this area in the plan. That is not to say that it is where more housing should go. It does however provide for very limited CIL payments to the community.
 The location does also play a very strategic role in enabling UK Central to reach its potential. As such sites in the area would have to be reviewed, alongside neighbouring authorities.

Full text:

There is very limited provision for housing in this area in the plan. That is not to say that it is where more housing should go. It does however provide for very limited CIL payments to the community.
the location does also play a very strategic role in enabling UK Central to reach its potential. As such sites in the area would have to be reviewed, alongside neighbouring authorities.

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 9440

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Open Spaces Society

Representation Summary:

Master plan approach is welcomed, but should be extended to all part of the
Borough. the master plans need to become more tightly defined during the further
development of the Local Plan. Should show how the policies elsewhere in the Local Plan are to be implemented in each specific site. Should be clear allocation and protection of areas for public access, should be secured in perpetuity by the dedication of the land as a Village Green, or by dedication of access rights under section 16 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. There is no mention in the Draft Plan of the designation of Local Green Space as set out in the NPPF para 99

In terms of green belt enhancements Potential improvements should be seen in the context of the agricultural use of much of the land, and of the prevailing Solihull Rights of Way
Improvement Plan 2016 (ROWIP). Best possible standards and practice should be applied for the physical state of the path network. Registration of unrecorded access rights should be encouraged and expedited. The Local Plan should also define how funding derived from developers will be applied to the other aspects of enhancements to the Green Belt.



Full text:

See attached letter. The Open Spaces Society is Britain's oldest national conservation body, founded in
1865. The Society's aim is to protect, increase, enhance and champion open spaces,
common land, village greens and public paths.
Consequently, sections 96 to 98 of the NPPF headed Open space and recreation are
seen of particular importance.
The questions addressed by the Society are those headed Do you agree with the
infrastructure requirements? for each area. These are Questions 3, 11, 16, 19, 22, 25, 29, and 31.
No equivalent question was asked about the UK Central Hub, so a comment has been made in response to Question 44.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 9672

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: West Midlands Police

Agent: Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Representation Summary:

The absence of positive references to the need to provide Police infrastructure undermines the delivery of safe and secure development. There should be express reference to the need for financial contributions towards additional expenditure burden placed on WM Police as a consequence of the proposed growth. Seek engagement in preparation of Concept Masterplans and policy implementation and delivery once Plan adopted.

Full text:

We act for the Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police (CCWMP) and are instructed to make representations on local development documents in respect of securing policy reference in such documents
see details in attached letter

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 9890

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Agent: Arcadis

Representation Summary:

Agree Site 10 can provide for affordable and special needs housing, but should also provide market housing to meet needs of all groups. Development should contribute to local infrastructure. CIL funding should provide improved infrastructure or upgrading of public open space within village. Enhancements should consider reclamation/enhancement of areas subject to mineral working, which could also include further development, including land south of Site 10.

Concept Masterplan
Demonstrates good use of space for open space incorporating lake, but density should not be too high/out of keeping.

Full text:

see letter

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 9928

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Generator (Balsall) & Minton

Agent: DS Planning

Representation Summary:

No objection in principle

Full text:

This is the response of Generator Group and Minton to the supplementary
consultation by Solihull Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The
purpose of the response is to comment on the draft Plan and promote the site on land adj Harpers Field, Kenilworth Road Balsall Common for inclusion as a housing
allocation within the Plan. The response is by question order. Whilst we have
responded to each question, the detailed points in relation to our site are set out under question 39 and your attention is specifically drawn to this part of the response. It should be noted the site is developer owned and delivery of the site can therefore come forward early in the plan period

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 9975

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Rosconn Stategic Land

Agent: DS Planning

Representation Summary:

No objection in principle

Full text:

This is the response of Rosconn Strategic Land to the supplementary consultation by
Solihull Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The purpose of the
response is to comment the draft Plan and promote three sites for inclusion as
housing allocations within the plan. The response is by question order.
The 3 sites are:
Land at Three Maypoles Farm Shirley
Land at r/o 2214 Stratford Road Hockley Heath
Land adj 161 Lugtrout Lane Solihull

The responses on the three sites to the Solihull Draft Local Plan 2016 consultation
are attached and which highlight the reasons why the sites should be allocations
within the Local Plan.

This document should also be read in conjunction with the Ecology Report and
Heritage Assessment in relation to land adj to 161 Lugtrout Lane, Solihull.
Your attention is also drawn to the attached Masterplan for land r/o 2214 Stratford
Road Hockley Heath.

Not withstanding that this is an informal consultation we consider that the document
should be accompanied by an up to date SA.

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 10015

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Stonewater

Agent: DS Planning

Representation Summary:

No objection in principle

Full text:

This is the response of Stonewater to the supplementary consultation by Solihull
Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The purpose of the response is
to comment the draft Plan and promote the site at the Firs Maxstoke Lane (west of
Meriden proposed allocation site 10) for inclusion as a housing allocation within the
Plan. The response is by question order.
The original response to the Solihull Draft Local Plan 2016 consultation is also
attached which highlights the reasons why the site should be an allocation within the
Local Plan (Site Ref 137).

see detailed comment in attached letter

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 10055

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Mr T Khan

Agent: DS Planning

Representation Summary:

No objection in principle

Full text:

This is the response of Mr Taj Khan, Sid Kelly and John Green to the supplementary
consultation by Solihull Council on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The
purpose of the response is to comment on the draft Plan and promote the site at 15,
59, & 61 Jacobean Lane Knowle for inclusion as a housing allocation within the Plan
and land north of Jacobean Lane being removed from the Green Belt and to support
the removal of land from the Green Belt to rectify anomalies and for consistency.
See detail response in attached letter and appendices

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 10097

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Minton (CdeB) Ltd

Agent: DS Planning

Representation Summary:

No objection in principle

Full text:

This is the response of Minton to the supplementary consultation by Solihull Council
on the Solihull Draft Local Plan January 2019. The purpose of the response is to
comment the draft Plan and promote the site at Oak Farm Catherine de Barnes for
inclusion as a housing allocation within the Plan. The response is by question order.
The original response to the Solihull Draft Local Plan 2016 consultation is also
attached which highlights the reasons why the full Oak Farm site should be an
allocation within the Local Plan. We have also carried out our own Green Belt
Assessment a copy of which is attached

Comment

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 10538

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Severn Trent Water

Representation Summary:

Severn Trent Water response:
Results of our high level sewer capacity assessment highlights some possible risks - of the proposed development on the sewerage and surface water network.
For most developments we do not foresee any particular issues. Where we consider there may be an issue we would discuss in further detail with the Local Planning Authority. Once detailed developments and site specific locations are confirmed by local councils, we are able to provide more specific comments and modelling of the network if required. We will complete any necessary improvements to provide additional capacity once we have sufficient confidence that a development will go ahead.
High Impact Sites:
- Maxstoke Lane, Meriden

Full text:

see attached document

Attachments: