Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 9888

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Agent: Arcadis

Settlement suitable for housing with its range of services, rail and bus services. Agree that former ammunition depot should be developed to create defensible boundary.
Acknowledge infrastructure requirements for the SLP Site24/DLP Site 6 and agree need for open space restricted to needs of new population, or contributions to assist upgrading/shortfall of existing facilities. Suggest CIL funding should be used for traffic calming and wider open space requirements in village.
Redevelopment of Site 6 which is brownfield and use has visual impacts, would provide substantial improvement and further enhancement unnecessary.
May consider provision of formalised footpath linking footpath alongside railway.

Support

Representation ID: 9889

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Agent: Arcadis

Support Site 6 allocation as contribution to housing supply and opportunity for range of housing including specialist housing for elderly and smaller homes. Logical extension of village alongside SLP allocated Site 24, allowing phased development with sites coming forward separately. Density should be appropriate to character of surroundings and allow sufficient flexibility.
Phasing should recognise different status of sites and ownerships meaning delivery in 3 phases to be reflected in masterplan.
Any shortfall of open space within site should be made up via contributions to improvements elsewhere in settlement and an allowance made for location in green belt.
Any drainage/SUDs feature must be realistic and achievable in terms of ownership, gradient and capacity.

Comment

Representation ID: 9890

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Agent: Arcadis

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.

Support

Representation ID: 9891

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Agent: Arcadis

Accept need to identify land for housing around Meriden, including Site 10. Site, together with others, could contribute to housing need. Appropriate as extension to village without having detrimental impact on character or surrounding area. Excellent highway links to Coventry and Birmingham avoiding village.

Comment

Representation ID: 10472

Received: 15/03/2019

Respondent: Packington Estate Enterprises Ltd

Agent: Arcadis

Further land within Meriden should be allocated for housing as village and facilities could accommodate additional numbers. Site 128 Area G Meriden, currently being quarried, could assist in additional housing and should be considered in part or full as logical extension to Site 10. Would enable a gateway development into Meriden from Birmingham Road/Maxstoke Lane roundabout and high quality reclamation of benefit to village. Would form logical and defensible boundary to western end of village.