Figure 5.9. A127 Corridor
Support
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 13228
Received: 07/03/2016
Respondent: Mr Colin Downey
yes
yes
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 13739
Received: 24/03/2016
Respondent: Mr M. Saddington
1- This will lead to overdevelopment of West Horndon village
2- The main focus of development seems to be concentrated in West Horndon although other areas have better road and rail links to London
3- The existing transport links in West Horndon will not support the proposed development.
4- This proposed dvelopment will result in substantial loss of Green Belt land around West Horndon
5- Very low level of support for development at Dunton
6- The A12 is already earmarked for upgrade to Motorway standard and there is plenty of Green Belt land along this route, why is there little or no development planned for this area
7- In West Horndon we are bounded by two other boroughs ie. Basildon and Thurrock and Havering is very near along the same road (St Mary's Lane). These boroughs could also put in development around West Horndon and this would be the end of West Horndon as anything like a village and would be a link development to London
8- The infrastructure development would be substantial and is not guaranteed to happen.
1- This will lead to overdevelopment of the village of West Horndon by doubling (at least) the population
2- The main focus of development in Brentwood seems to be concentrated in the West Horndon area. Despite the fact that other areas also have road and rail links to London, most of which are far better than those available in West Horndon
3- The existing transport links in West Horndon will not support the proposed development. C2C at West Horndon is only a two track route to London and is already at capacity during rush hour times
4- This proposed dvelopment will result in substantial loss of Green Belt land around the West Horndon area
5- Very low level of support for development at Dunton in any shape or form which is continued to be ignored by Brentwood Council
6- The A12 is already earmarked for upgrade to Motorway standard and there is plenty of Green Belt land along this route, why is there little or no development planned for this area
7- In West Horndon we are bounded by two other boroughs ie. Basildon and Thurrock and Havering is very near along the same road (St Mary's Lane). These boroughs could also put in development around West Horndon and this would be the end of West Horndon as anything like a village and would be a link development to London
8- The infrastructure development would be substantial and is not guaranteed to happen.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 13978
Received: 22/03/2016
Respondent: Bulphan Community Forum
Local Plan not very local when of the proposed 5000 new homes 3000 are to be located in just 2 developments at the extreme edges of the borough. People in them will not see themselves as part of Brentwood. They will gravitate towards other areas or centres. These developments along with the proposed Enterprise areas in the A127 corridor will put too much strain on the junction of the A127 and the M25. There is no provision for improvement whereas the A12 is being improved.
The local plan does not seem to be very local to the rest of the borough considering of the proposed 5000 new homes 3000 are to be located in just 2 developments at the extreme edges of the borough. And relatively close to each other. So although these areas will have road links the people in them will not see themselves as part of Brentwood. They will gravitate towards other areas or centres. . These developments along with the proposed Enterprise areas in the A127 corridor will put too much strain on the junction of the A127 and the M25. The A127 is already congested. There is no provision for improvement whereas the A12 is being improved. The public transport from West Horndon to Brentwood town centre is infrequent and not fit for purposed if the size of the village is to be doubled. The Dunton Garden development although in the borough boundary will, to all intense purposes, be a development of Basildon (Laindon) and will have no connect physical connection to Brentwood and will have no identity with the Borough. So apart from achieving a quota of housing and gaining some local tax for the borough any additional economic benefits will fall to Basildon. The lack provision of school places in the local areas to these developments will lead to further traffic flows to and from the wider areas.
And in what order will the developments take place?
I would like to see the smaller developments take place first.
Organic growth will be much less intrusive and will allow the area to slowly digest the changes.
Only when these options have run out should larger developments on Green Belt land be considered. the used of Green Belt should be a last resort.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14256
Received: 11/04/2016
Respondent: Zada Capital
Policy States "Development sites will have no significant impact on the Green Belt, visual amenity..." How does the Council consider the building of over 5000 homes at Dunton meets this criteria. Impact will be significant and will adversely the Green Belt and existing services, as will 500 homes on the West Horndon Industrial estate.
The A127 is a pinch point for traffic and running at capacity new development here will exacerbate the problem. If significant work is required to improve services how is the proposed sustainable?
See attached.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14398
Received: 15/04/2016
Respondent: Mrs D Middleton
The scale of the proposals for housing in West Horndon both in relation to the size of West Horndon and in terms of the proportion of the Borough's housing numbers the village is being asked to accommodate is unrealistic and will turn the village into a town the same size as Brentwood is now. ( Dunton Hills 9000 house if all of the land is sold to developers).
See attached.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14399
Received: 15/04/2016
Respondent: Mrs D Middleton
A large proportion of the land allocation in West Horndon is Metropolitan Green Belt, with no exceptional circumstances put forwards to justify the release of this Green Belt land. West Horndon not being a sustainable location for the scale of development proposed based on existing size, infrastructure, services, and transport availability. The LDP just says "should" provide better infrastructure - not guaranteed
See attached.
Support
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14604
Received: 19/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Colin Foan
* I support the concept of the J29 Employment Cluster. It will be particularly good for employment that requires significant HGV activity.
* Need to ensure that there is sufficient public transport access to the site
1. I acknowledge the challenges the LDP needs to address and the difficulties Brentwood Borough Council faces to deliver all the requirements
* Strategic Housing allocation
o 360 new home per year from 2013
o This amounts to 5500 over a 15-year time frame or 7200 over 20 years
o Brentwood is 89% Green Belt
o Brentwood only has brown field locations for ~2500 houses
o Thus needs to find locations for some 3000 extra houses
o Inevitably some of these will have to be built on land that is currently classed as green belt
o Green belt loss must be kept to an absolute minimum
* Employments needs
* Retail sites
2. I total support for protection of the green belt, especially the area immediately next to the Village of West Horndon. Under no circumstances should this Green Belt be sacrificed to meet housing need. It would be creep and start to join the urban areas of Greater London with Basildon. It would also change the rural character of the existing village beyond recognition.
3. I accept development of the Brown Field Industrial estate but need to find appropriate solutions to the infrastructure issues this creates. These include:
o Safe acceptable road access onto the site - the current entrance is already a hazard. Changing the Industrial estate to mixed residential without a security gate to slow traffic would increase the hazard significantly
o Need to ensure development has SuDs in place
o Schools places
o Doctors/medical facilities
o Mixed development
* some of the more modern industrial units to remain
* Starter homes
* Family homes
* Homes for elderly/disabled residents
o Development that is compatible with the current village style not too dense, 30 homes per ha maximum if possible somewhat less
* Maximum housing density of 30 homes per ha (pro rata down if as probable some of the smaller industrial units remain)
4. I accept with great reluctance the concept that if Green Belt development has to take place as set out in the NPPF section 83, then it should be as separate discreet village developments and not wide spread small incremental additions. They must be big enough to be self-sustainable and generate sufficient CIL &106 money to provide appropriate infrastructure, but not so big as to become small towns. Only the absolute minimum amount of Green Belt should be reclassified in order to prevent further development at some time in the future.
* Dunton Garden Village
o Done properly this is possibly the least harmful option
o Accept the idea of achieving the required level of development by building new villages that are self-sustainable and developed in such a way as to deter further development creep
o Question the size at 2500 - the new West Horndon with the development of the industrial estate will be ~ 1100 to 1200 homes. DHGV should replicate that and not be much bigger, although I might accept slightly more if it could be proved that a larger number was absolutely necessary to generate the required infrastructure
o There needs to be an environmental barrier between DHGV and West Horndon so as to prevent the possibility of developmental creep in the future
o There are a lot infrastructure issues that need to be resolved these include:
* Road access
* Schools - junior & senior
* Medical facilities
* Access to the railway station
* A127 capacity
* C2C rail capacity
o If the DHGV option is progressed, then as per my comments in section 4 above only the absolute minimum of land necessary should be reclassified. In appendix 2 on page 185 site ref 200 is identified as being 237.49ha. This is vastly more land than is required for even the proposed 2500 houses. I strongly object to this whole area being reclassified as that would make further redevelopment and thus urban creep much easier to occur in the future
* A127 capacity vs A12 corridor capacity
o Disagree that the capacity of both the rail and road are greater for the A127 corridor than the A12
o Much of the A12 is already 6 lane and there are plans in place to upgrade all the 4 lanes sections from the M25 to Marks Tey to 6 lanes.
o There are no 6 lane sections on the A127 and plans to upgrade it are only at a very early stage. This would need to be done before more development takes palace.
o The railway from Shenfield station into London as 4 tracks and is currently being upgraded by the Crossrail project.
o The C2C railway from Southend to London Fenchurch Street is only two tracks and expansion west of Upminster would be almost impossible because the tracks run through built/residential areas.
The A12 corridor already clearly has far more capacity than the A127 and plans to upgrade it even further far more advanced.
* To prevent creep, the overriding priority must be to protect the green belt immediately around the village of West Horndon
* Any development that takes place must be preceded or at the very least accompanied by appropriate and necessary infrastructure. Under no circumstance should infrastructure come after development
* All developments must have appropriate levels of affordable housing. Where possible this should be prioritised for Brentwood residents.
* BBC will need to work out how to get/guarantee any rail infrastructure upgrades, these are not part of the same development plan and Network rail have a long history of delay and failure to implement necessary infrastructure improvements.
* I support the concept of the J29 Employment Cluster. It will be particularly good for employment that requires significant HGV activity.
o Need to ensure that there is sufficient public transport access to the site
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14631
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Kevin Mate
Road and rail infrastructure in the A127 is already at (and often above) capacity. It is not clear why the A127 had greater potential for improvements than the A12. The consultation implied that the A127 had greater development potential due to it having a "different landscape character". There may be a different landscape character, however the local residents' value of the open space and farmland should not be considered any lower than the appreciation residents elsewhere in the Borough have for their landscape. The open, fenland landscape is valued extremely highly by local residents, and contributes to a rural feel to this area and local settlements.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14632
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Kevin Mate
Flood risk had not been addressed for any of the sites. It is clearly a major problem for the A127 Corridor.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14637
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Kevin Mate
With regards to infrastructure, it was noted that the consultation ignored the A128 which is the key link between the A127 Corridor and Brentwood. Additionally, concentrated development within the A127 Corridor would simply exacerbate expected further strain on the Shoeburyness to Fenchurch Street rail line, with authorities all the way up this line expected to build extensively around it.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14657
Received: 20/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Kevin Mate
Question whether the BBC stated need to meet objectively assessed housing needs justifies using green belt land for housing development. Whilst the Borough as a whole would lose only 1% of its Green Belt, the local impact on West Horndon Parish and indeed the south of the Borough is far more material. The policies proposed within the Draft Local Plan will actually contribute to urban sprawl and ribbon development along the A127.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14761
Received: 21/04/2016
Respondent: Mr. Stuart Giles
The Draft Local Plan has consistently ignored potentially viable alternative sites focusing primarily on the A127 Corridor. The A12 corridor should be considered for housing as some of the infrastructure required to support additional housing is already being put in place such as the A12 being upgraded to 3 lanes, with the A12 Corridor also benefiting from Crossrail.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14794
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Derek Agombar
Brnetwood draft plan is flawed in that its biggest allocation of housing is all south of the A127. The road and rail set up is already running at near capacity. The plan does not take advantage on the new Crossrail infrastructure & increased capacity by rail. This is a major failing, and missed opportunity.
See attached.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14797
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Derek Agombar
The biggest flaw to this plan is route 4 Lower Thames Crossing. How the draft plan caome about without consulting Highways England is gross incompetance. This route cannot be dismissed. It is a viable option. A plan B is much needed. Urgently.
See attached.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14808
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Mrs Sandra Mate
Road and rail infrastructure in the A127 is already at (and often above) capacity. It is not clear why the A127 had greater potential for improvements than the A12. The consultation implied that the A127 had greater development potential due to it having a "different landscape character". There may be a different landscape character, however the local residents' value of the open space and farmland should not be considered any lower than the appreciation residents elsewhere in the Borough have for their landscape. The open, fenland landscape is valued extremely highly by local residents, and contributes to a rural feel to this area and local settlements.
See attachment.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14809
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Mrs Sandra Mate
Flood risk had not been addressed for any of the sites. It is clearly a major problem for the A127 Corridor.
See attachment.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14813
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Mrs Sandra Mate
With regards to infrastructure, it was noted that the consultation ignored the A128 which is the key link between the A127 Corridor and Brentwood. Additionally, concentrated development within the A127 Corridor would simply exacerbate expected further strain on the Shoeburyness to Fenchurch Street rail line, with authorities all the way up this line expected to build extensively around it.
See attachment.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 14823
Received: 22/04/2016
Respondent: Mrs Sandra Mate
Question whether the BBC stated need to meet objectively assessed housing needs justifies using green belt land for housing development. Whilst the Borough as a whole would lose only 1% of its Green Belt, the local impact on West Horndon Parish and indeed the south of the Borough is far more material. The policies proposed within the Draft Local Plan will actually contribute to urban sprawl and ribbon development along the A127.
See attachment.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15037
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Lisa Atkinson
This scale and concentration proposed will irrevocably harm the landscape, environment and Green Belt within this area (at a disproportionate level than the wider Borough).
See attached.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15039
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Lisa Atkinson
The A127 corridor in Brentwood is sandwiched between Upminster and Laindon. Proposals would create ribbon development and be very detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt at this location.
See attached.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15041
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Lisa Atkinson
The plan has ignored proposed upgrade of the A12 or Crossrail. The A127 and C2C are at capacity. Need for significant upgrade.
See attached.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15042
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Lisa Atkinson
Unclear whether all available and suitable brownfield sites have been considered eg the Childerditch Industrial Estate has not been considered.
See attached.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15044
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Lisa Atkinson
Challenge whether West Horndon is suitable for development due to flood risk.
See attached.
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15045
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Ian Atkinson
This scale and concentration proposed will irrevocably harm the landscape, environment and Green Belt within this area (at a disproportionate level than the wider Borough).
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15046
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Ian Atkinson
The A127 corridor in Brentwood is sandwiched between Upminster and Laindon. Proposals would create ribbon development and be very detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt at this location.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15047
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Ian Atkinson
Sustainable development in the West Horndon area should be limited to less than 500 new homes, these would still need infrastructure expenditure. Redevelopment of West Horndon industrial estates would reduce the HGV traffic. However, it would still double the homes in West Horndon. 500 or more additional cars would also have an impact.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15048
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Ian Atkinson
The plan has ignored proposed upgrade of the A12 or Crossrail. The A127 and C2C are at capacity. Need for significant upgrade.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15049
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Mr Ian Atkinson
Challenge whether West Horndon is suitable for development due to flood risk.
See attached
Comment
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15302
Received: 04/05/2016
Respondent: Transport for London
The A127 corridor is also earmarked for a degree of development in the draft plan; however it is obvious this corridor does not enjoy the same level of public transport connectivity as the A12/GEML corridor. As such there is a concern that, without improvements to public transport and given high car ownership levels in the borough, growth here may increase car commuting and add to congestion on the TRLN. Therefore development should fund the necessary improvements to public transport, walking and cycling to ensure the objectives of the NPPF, in terms of choice of modes of travel, are met. Limiting development elsewhere in the borough where it is unlikely to be viable to serve by public transport will also help in this respect.
See attached.
Comment
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15553
Received: 18/03/2016
Respondent: Rochford District Council
A127, A130 and A13 forms part of the strategic road network for South Essex. Any development proposed in proximity to these corridors should be accompanied by adequate mitigation measures.
Two strategic development sites are proposed within the vicinity of the A127 corridor to the south east and south west of the Borough. Unclear from the Draft Local Plan what mitigation measures would be required to accompany significant development in this location. Strongly recommended that any future iterations of the Local Plan are clearly accompanied by appropriate mitigation measures. This will ensure proposals would not detrimentally impact the A127.
Thank you for inviting Rochford District Council, as a Local Planning Authority in a neighbouring Housing Market Area, to submit comments on Brentwood Borough Council's Draft Local Plan 2016. Rochford District Council recognises that this is the first formal stage in the development of Brentwood's local development plan and therefore welcomes the opportunity to provide comments at this early opportunity.
The A127 - alongside the A130 and A13 - forms part of the strategic road network for South Essex serving as a key route for residents and businesses living in the District and surrounding areas. It is therefore imperative that any development proposed in proximity to any of these corridors, is accompanied by adequate mitigation measures to the strategic road network.
Two strategic development sites are proposed within the vicinity of the A127 corridor to the south east and south west of the Borough. However, it is unclear from the Draft Local Plan 2016, what mitigation measures would be required to accompany significant development in this location. It is therefore strongly recommended that any future iterations of Brentwood's new Local Plan are clearly accompanied by appropriate mitigation measures, to ensure that any proposals would not have a detrimental impact on the A127 in particular.
Rochford District Council would welcome opportunities to engage with Brentwood Borough Council on strategic planning matters - particularly in relation to meeting housing needs and highways impacts - through the Duty to Co-operate as both Local Planning Authorities continue to progress and review their respective local development plans.
Interim Sustainability Appraisal
Thank you for inviting Rochford District Council, as a Local Planning Authority in a neighbouring Housing Market Area, to submit comments on Brentwood Borough Council's Interim Sustainability Appraisal for the Draft Local Plan 2016. The Council has no observations to make.