brentwood.gov.uk

I have read the Local Plan 2015 - 2030: Preferred Options for Consultation with interest and while I can understand the overall rationale I must object to the proposed development at West Horndon. There are many reasons why the village of West Horndon objects. I will focus on the following:

Policy CP4: West Horndon Opportunity Area
Policy CP13: Sustainable Transport
Policy DM1: General Development Criteria
Policy DM5: Employment Development Criteria

Policy CP4: West Horndon Opportunity Area
Justification 3.7 states that West Horndon has "good road and rail access". Whilst true it does have a train station the train line, operated by c2c, runs from Fenchurch Street to Shoeburyness. It does not stop, nor pass through, any other stations in Brentwood Borough and peak trains run once every 20 minutes c2c has no plans to increase the frequency of the trains.

In order to gain rail access to the other Brentwood Borough stations travellers would have to either: travel to Upminster, change to the Greater Anglia line to Romford and change trains again to catch a train towards Brentwood; or, travel to Southend and change train lines to come back towards London.

Whilst West Horndon does provide good access to the City, the "good rail access" will not improve access to the Borough, nor help to keep jobs within the borough as those travelling by train are much less likely to live within the borough unless they live within West Horndon itself.

Policy CP13: Sustainable Transport
I commend you for seeking to reduce travel, congestion and pollution, but I fail to see how you will achieve this. The reduction in travel is linked to providing jobs in West Horndon, but these are likely to be in retail, with some small offices. Given that your own research to date shows that a higher than average percentage of Brentwood borough residents commute to central London, I would like to understand how retail and small offices will keep jobs local. What plans are in place to encourage those who would occupy the 1500 new homes in prime commuter belt to work locally? Without these details I can not assess the full impact so have to object.

Justification 3.57 seeks to reduce car travel, partly by introducing a Green Travel Route (3.59) to link Brentwood with West Horndon and the Enterprise park. The journey from Brentwood to West Horndon on the proposed Green Travel Route is 5.5 miles and currently would take c. 20 minutes at peak times, not including the additional time a bus requires to pick up and set down passengers. The journey from West Horndon to Brentwood would be 6.5 miles and take 27 minutes, again without accounting for the additional time required. I have to question again why those moving to the new home in the borough would make this journey to get to work when they could:

a. Commute to any of the other major employment centres on their train line (c2c/Greater Anglia). West Horndon to Basildon takes 8 minutes; Brentwood to Shenfield takes 6 minutes. Passengers can even get to Fenchurch Street and Liverpool Street in 30 and 38 minutes respectively.
b. Drive, taking short-cuts and not stopping at each bus stop, reducing their journey time and providing greater flexibility throughout the day.

At present, because I assume the transport assessment is still forthcoming, the frequency and practicality of such a service has not been determined. Nor has the cost of a ticket per journey/season tickets. Similarly, improved walking and cycling routes have not yet been defined. I would point out that to the average commuter, walking or cycling 5.5 - 6.5 miles to get to work would be considered too far and be too time consuming.

The bus journey on the proposed Green Travel Route has to utilise the A127. The road is already at capacity and arguably over capacity during peak times with a build up of traffic back past the Junction with the A128. Without understanding how the additional traffic, firstly from demolishing the industrial estate and building the new development, then from the occupants and business of the new development in West Horndon, would be accommodated on the A127 I can not asses if it is practical so can not support the plan.

Policy DM1: General Development Criteria
The policy states that the development should "have no adverse affect on the visual amenity, the character or appearance of the surrounding area". While you do acknowledge in Justification 4.3 that new dwellings should not look out of place, the addition of 1500 homes plus the other (mixed) development will treble the size of the village changing dramatically the character or 'feel' of the village. I, and many other residents of West Horndon, chose the village because we wished to live in a small, close-knit, community. Trebling the size of the village will remove this, it will no longer be the type of place in which I chose to live. In addition, there is a risk, given the location of the development, that a 'them and us' culture could develop. Without understanding how this will be sensitively managed I can not support the development.

Policy DM5: Employment Development Criteria
I can not agree that trebling the size of the village will mean that the development complies with point a. "be of a scale and nature appropriate to the locality". Point d requires vehicular access to avoid residential streets and county lanes. I have to question how this will be achieved. Current access to the site is via the main road in West Horndon which is a residential street. The development is planned over 15 years, this would be many, many years of disruption for the residents.

I am aware that there are many more objections to the proposed West Horndon development, including the flood risk as the village has flooded twice in the past three years. There is also concern that a secondary school has not been proposed, this would require further transport to be provided to enable children aged between 11 - 16 to attend a school, potentially in a neighbouring borough.

While I do support the development of brown-field sites I can not support the development of green-field sites. Moving the current West Horndon industrial park to a new location with vastly improved road access makes good sense, as does developing the current Industrial site to accommodate new housing and a small mix of other amenities. The current infrastructure is also significantly more likely to be able to cope with a smaller scale development.

I would like to understand how the neighbouring boroughs have been consulted about the plans. As West Horndon is on the very edge of Brentwood borough, any increases to population will impact both Havering and Thurrock. What impact is this expected to have on them and are they able to cope with the proposals?

In conclusion, I can not support the development plans as they stand for West Horndon as I do not believe the village or the infrastructure can support them. I also question the time and cost required to make improvements to the infrastructure if the plans were to go ahead as shown. How would the drastic improvements be funded?

I would be happy to discuss my comments and look forward to the Community Master Planning exercise.