brentwood.gov.uk

Support

Representation ID: 801

Received: 26/09/2013

Respondent: EA Strategic Land LLP

Agent: Iceni Projects Limited

The approach set out in the spatial strategy at S1 and the locations in which to focus the development is supported. We agree that these locations, including the west horndon allocation is capable of accommodating the growth required over the plan period. This proposed strategy is considered to be the most appropriate, and in particular we agree Alternative Option 3 is not suitable. This alternative option will not enable sufficient delivery of growth or critical mass to enable improvements to infrastructure, settlements such as WH not only provide the most logical solution in terms of infrastructure constraints and accessibility, but can take advantage of under-utilised existing infrastructure, notably the excellent rail links of the settlement. The proposed change to ensure that WH is not within the GB is also welcomed however, it is considered that it would be beneficial to extend this allocation to include the entire parcel of land to the west of Thorndon Ave, not only the southernmost section. This will create a defensible boundary to the GB as stated in Para 85 of the NPPF. This will ensure that the council can be sure that the GB boundary would not need to be altered before the end of the plan period. This land can provide the necessary flexibility concerning the form of future development proposals. By way of justification for S1, Brentwood has set out a settlement hierarchy in para's 2.12-2.16. The purpose of this is to show how it has assessed suitable locations in which to accommodate growth in a sustainable manner. West Horndon is catogrised as a settlement 3 -large village. In our opinion it is more significant settlement than that and should be catogorised accordingly. We would suggest a new tier of settlement be created above catorgory 2 and that this should be entitled "Garden Village" settlements.