Draft Local Plan Review

Search representations

Results for Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd search

New search New search

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q4. Do you agree with Policy P1? If not why not, and what alternative would you suggest?

Representation ID: 3830

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Representation Summary:

Generally support.
Arden Cross, Site 19:
Support release of Green Belt land.
Would like to see housing numbers increased back to 2,000 to enable a sustainable vibrant urban quarter.
Emphasis should be placed on early development opportunities in line with Government and WMCA aims.
Birmingham Airport:
Recognise importance of a successful regional Airport.
Prefer Site 20 area for expansion to east of A452.
Jaguar Land Rover:
Recognise importance of JLR to regional economy.
Development expansion should not be considered in isolation from Airport aspirations.

Full text:

see attached letter

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q6. Do you agree with Policy P1A? If not why not, and what alternative would you suggest?

Representation ID: 3831

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Representation Summary:

Largely supportive of policy and recognise contribution this area could play in development of wider UKC Hub.

Full text:

see attached letter

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q9. Do you agree with Policy P3? If not why not, and what alternative would you suggest?

Representation ID: 3834

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Representation Summary:

Additional provision should be made in the policy for 'development that enables and supports the establishment of rural business and in particular those that make
provision for leisure and recreational use of the countryside'.
Fourth paragraph, p.60, should be amended to read:
'The Council will encourage the retention and appropriately sized expansion of small ........'

Full text:

see attached letter

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Alternative Site Suggested (Call for Sites)

Representation ID: 3845

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Representation Summary:

SHELAA site 128 West of Meriden (Area G).
Disappointed site not included in DLP, particularly as no consultation or opportunity to discuss in advance, or whether a smaller site would be preferable.
Wish to resubmit a smaller site (25 acres) for residential only, but flexible to change.
Currently a depleted quarry going through a transformation of inert refill. Would be possible to ensure backfill was appropriate for future residential development.
Immediately adjacent to Meriden and its facilities, open space, public transport, walking and cycling opportunities.
Minimal visual impact due to existing screening.
No infrastructure or access constraints.
Deliverable years 11-15.




Full text:

see attached letter and appendices - Area G SHELAA site 128

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

06 Hampton-in-Arden - Meriden Road

Representation ID: 3893

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Agent: Arcadis

Representation Summary:

Packington Estate supports the removal of the land from the Green Belt and the allocation of the extended Meriden Road site for housing but does not consider the delivery timescale to be appropriate or justified.

Full text:

Please find attached appropriate representations to the Local Plan Review in regards to Site 6 (Meriden Road, Hampton-in-Arden) on behalf of our client, Packington Estates.

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q11. Do you agree with Policy P4? If not why not, and what alternative would you suggest?

Representation ID: 6241

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Representation Summary:

Recognise need for affordable housing, but challenge 50% requirement on 11+ units.
Understand that standard and affordable housing need to be integrated, 50% seems excessive.
May impact viability, could prevent development coming forward.

Full text:

see attached letter

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q15. Do you believe we are planning to build new homes in the right locations? If not why not, and which locations do you believe shouldn't be included? Are there any other locations that you think

Representation ID: 6242

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Representation Summary:

Largely support Council's approach to identifying land for the provision for housing.
Separate representation made in respect to SHELAA Site 128.

Full text:

see attached letter

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q18. Do you agree with the policies for improving accessibility and encouraging sustainable travel? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 6243

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Representation Summary:

Policy P8A:
Plan showing the proposed route of the rapid transit would be helpful, and should be considered when allocating sites for housing/development.

Full text:

see attached letter

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q19. Do you agree with the policies for protecting the environment? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 6244

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Representation Summary:

Policy P10 -
Natural Environment:
Welcome importance being placed on maintaining a healthy, natural environment, which is consistent with Packington Estate's longer stewardship objectives.
Suggest including contribution development (in rural areas and Green Belt) makes to the viability of maintaining landscape biodiversity. Conservation and enhancement cannot take place without income and capital.
Arden Landscape section could be linked to Policy P3.
Arden Landscape, Biodiversity/Geodiversity:
Packington Estate, in particular the Deer Park contribute to the original Forest of Arden landscape. Any expansion east of A452 would negatively impact landscape character, River Blythe SSSI and result in 1000s of mature trees.

Full text:

see attached letter

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q19. Do you agree with the policies for protecting the environment? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 6245

Received: 17/02/2017

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Representation Summary:

Policy P11 -
Flood Risk Reduction:
Welcome policy that ensures developers must promote developments that reduce flood risk and look to reinstate the natural floodplain where feasible, to include de-culverting and improvements of on-site watercourses.

Full text:

see attached letter

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.