brentwood.gov.uk

There are elements of the Draft Local Development Plan that I support but my concerns for West Horndon as a Professional Engineer and resident are sufficiently great that I object to the Draft LDP. In general I support the change of use of Site 020 and Site 021 but emphatically object to development of Site 037. The draft LDP is not robust in justifying development on green belt land and lacks necessary supporting evidence.

My grounds for objection are thus:
O1. The total of 1,500 new dwellings proposed would approximately triple the size of West Horndon. Maintaining the character of the village would be incompatible with such a disproportionate allocation of new homes.
O2. The development of Site 037 would be on Green Belt land which is protected to prevent urban sprawl. This is in direct conflict with the Draft LDP's Strategic Objective SO7 to "Safeguard the Green Belt". In addition, the Draft LDP has not set out exceptional circumstances that justify the loss of this land. Permitting such a development may set a precedent for future development of West Horndon and surrounding areas.

O3. Environment Agency flood maps (available online) show much of the existing village to be at risk of flooding and there is experience of it occurring recently and historically. Whilst Site 037 is predominantly outside the area shown by the EA to be at flood risk, development on the site without due consideration could increase the flood risk to the existing and proposed development. This would be by reducing the amount of permeable land for rainwater to soak away and also increasing the amount of surface water run-off to be managed. The draft proposal does not address the issue of how flood risk will be affected and mitigated.
O4. Such a marked increase in housing in West Horndon would require a robust appraisal of the current infrastructure's capacity and requirements for upgrade. An Infrastructure Delivery Plan is referred to by the Draft LDP but is noted as 'forthcoming'.
O5. Whilst West Horndon has a railway station, there are presently no plans to increase the level of service for the village. Elsewhere in the borough, Shenfield and Brentwood stations are set to benefit from improved services by the Crossrail project yet they are currently assigned a lower proportion of the housing target.
O6. Whilst I am aware of the need for additional housing in the borough, this should not be at the expense of existing residential areas and where possible it should improve the quality of living to those existing areas whilst also providing a high standard for the new dwellings. There are already other areas within the borough with inappropriate land uses amongst residential areas, such as the Wates Way Industrial Estate in Brentwood and Kestrel Park in Shenfield.

My comments of support are thus:
S1. The change of use of Site 021 and Site 020 to residential would benefit the village, as the draft LDP states. The current use is in conflict with the residential areas. As a resident of Station Road I am persistently disturbed by noise and vibration as heavy goods vehicles pass by on their way to and from the industrial estates. The vibration is particularly intrusive and can be felt throughout my house as large vehicles pass during both day and night.