Policy 7.1: Dunton Hills Garden Village
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15058
Received: 27/04/2016
Respondent: Mrs Christine Blythe
The proposed new village is not equitable, deliverable or sustainable, requires the release of a significant area of GB land, adds more pressure to the already congested A127, is disproportionate in terms of total housing capacity for the Borough from one single source and will not be deliverable within a reasonable timeframe. I strongly disagree that para 5.41 "A proportionate approach has been taken...". It is clear contrary to para 5.42 the Council has NOT "applied densities to potential development sites in a realistic manner...".
1.
I strongly object to the current Spatial Strategy in the draft Local Plan. It fails to take into account the needs of existing villages in the north of the Borough.
The draft Local Plan disproportionally favours the centre and south of the Borough, along existing transport corridors that are already congested, while failing to take into account the needs of existing villages in the north of the Borough, like Blackmore. The Strategic Growth Options consultation document (2015) recognizes that villages must grow to provide for local need, the current draft Spatial Strategy fails to take this into account. Where is the evidence to support this U-turn in planning policy?
2.
Has the Council provided a Settlement Hierarchy paper to assess the needs at local villages?
For example what is the justification in allowing development at Mountessing, rather than larger villages further north in the Borough, like Blackmore? If the Council is basing the plan on transport corridors alone, it has failed to objectively assess the needs across the entire Borough.
3.
SO's 1 &2 (pg 25) prejudice development growth to existing or proposed infrastructure to the centre and south of the Borough. The Council has a duty of care to ensure the entire Borough's needs are met to 2033 and the draft plan only meets the needs of part of the Borough.
4.
S03 is not being met in the north of the Borough in the respect of creating "inclusive, balanced, sustainable communities" (p25) to the year 2033. An objectively assessed local plan would recognize the need to ensure that existing villages, like Blackmore, need some development to retain their working population which will ensure that services such as local shops, leisure amenities, primary schools, GP practices and public transport services are sustained.
5.
The proposed plan fails to spread economic prosperity across the Borough and in particular in the north of the Borough. SO4, S05, S06, S07 promoting Economic Prosperity in the Borough (pg 25) focus on Brentwood and new development in the south of the Borough. There is no evidence that this plan seeks to implement SO8 (Promote and support a prosperous rural economy) in the north of the Borough because no GB development is planned, despite there being no brownfield opportunities.
6.
How do you define "inappropriate" (S09 Safeguard the Green Belt from inappropriate development and enhance its beneficial use, pg 26)? A 10% increase in existing villages for the next 20 years (is "inappropriate") but the creation of a new garden village of 2,500 houses (is "appropriate")?
7. How do you define "character"?
Para. 5.21 of the draft plan indicate's that development in the rural north and rural south will be limited to retain local "character". Throughout the plan there are references to safeguarding the GB land and then the need to release some GB land for development as 96% of the Borough falls in GB allocation. Surely the loss of village services as a result of inadequate housing and subsequent decline in the working age community will result in a detrimental "character"?
8. Assessment of GB Site
An assessment of 60 GB sites was produced after this plan was written. And yet the draft plan proposes to create a new garden village at Dunton Hills on GB land that is rated "medium value", for 2,500 new homes (35%) of housing needs in the Borough to 2033, compared to SHLAA site G070A, Land South of Redrose Lane, Blackmore, being promoted by Crest Nicholson for circa 40 houses within the village with clearly defensible boundaries is also rated "medium" but not part of the proposed allocation plan. A Local Housing Requirements Study for Blackmore by Barton Wilmore in August 2013 projected household growth in the village required circa 80 dwellings in the next 20 years.
9. Villages in the north of the Borough will atrophy over the period of the plan.
As the plan covers the to period 2033, Blackmore and some of the other larger villages in the north of the Borough will atrophy in this timespan. How when both sites are rated GB "medium value" can it be justified to "create" rather than "sustain" a village?
Furthermore as the Council has noted "new housing growth will deliver a boost to the local economy" para. 5.39 Why then is there no consideration of the larger villages, like Blackmore in the north of the Borough?
10.
I strongly object to the creation of a new garden village at Dunton Hills.
The proposed new village is not equitable, deliverable or sustainable, requires the release of a significant area of GB land, adds more pressure to the already congested A127, is disproportionate in terms of total housing capacity for the Borough from one single source and will not be deliverable within a reasonable timeframe. I strongly disagree that para 5.41 "A proportionate approach has been taken...". It is clear contrary to para 5.42 the Council has NOT "applied densities to potential development sites in a realistic manner...".
11. Brownfield Redevelopment Opportunities in the rural north and rural south of the Borough
These "Brownfield redevelopment opportunities" (para 5.33) do not exist in the GB villages to the north of the Borough. The case has been made in this draft plan that larger villages in the rural north of the Borough have limited services/amenities and therefore development should not take place here. A limited amount of development needs to take place here to ensure the future vitality and viability of villages like Blackmore. This does not mean changing the "character" of the north of the Borough but rather managing growth in a discrete and viable way.
12.
I strongly disagree with the statement para 5.41 "the Council has reluctantly considered appropriate and sustainable locations within Green Belt". (See point 8 above)
With regard to S010 (Protect & enhance valuable landscape & the natural and historic environment), Figure 9.1 Environment and Biodiversity (p126) indicates that the proposed development sites to the south of the Borough are in areas of a high concentration of both local wildlife sites and sites of special scientific interest, compared to those in the north of the Borough which have a much lower concentration of these sites.
What justification can there be to allow the development of 2,500 houses in one area in GB, while not allowing a 10% growth of existing villages in the next 20 years. Para 9.53 "Development will be restricted to those limited types of development which may be allowed in exceptional circumstances within the Green Belt" but barring Brownfield opportunities such development has been excluded in the rural villages of the north of the Borough.
13.
With regard to SO11, S012, S13 re the Quality of Life & Community Infrastructure, rural villages to the north of the Borough have been largely overlooked.
For example S012 Improving public transport, cycle and walking facilities and encourage sustainable transport choices should be implemented throughout the Borough. Villages such as Blackmore need to maintain a demand for a bus service for it to be economically viable for services to run which means the village needs to maintain an active, balanced community. The existing road network needs to be maintained to 2033 to enable rural villages to reach existing and new services/amenities available in the Brentwood area.
The bias of the current plan is again evidenced by the lack of a proposed Green Travel Route linking villages to the north of the Borough to Brentwood and/or train links. Figure 10.1 Proposes a Green Travel Route to support the proposed development in the south, while ignoring linkages and benefits for those villages in the north of the Borough.
Ensuring a viable bus service, maintaining current road networks and implementing a Green Travel Route to the north of Brentwood would be in line with S011 & S012.
S013 benefits the centre and south of the Borough alone if the plan allows for no development to take place in the rural north. It seems that the population of the Borough is intended to be concentrated in a confined geographic area. It must be possible to protect and enjoy the GB in the Borough while at the same time permitting a more equitable dispersal of the population in the area available.
14. Primary school places in the Borough
I note that Brentwood has capacity for secondary school places but limited capacity for primary school places. Building new villages and new schools takes a significant amount of time. Keeping primary schools open in rural villages is key to ensuring an "inclusive, balanced, sustainable" pg 25 S03 community. Primary school capacity currently exists within the village of Blackmore and perhaps within other villages. Do we need to create a new village or focus on maintaining the ones that currently exist?
15. Housing Trajectory
Para 5.46 states that "The Council has strived to be realistic about the likelihood of sites coming forward .... A clear commitment is shown in this Plan to bring forward land as quickly as possible to meet housing needs swiftly in line with national policy and guidance."
May I ask why, when in the Council's SHLAA (2010) and Draft Site Assessment (July 2013) site (ref 70A, site 076 in this plan) is identified as a suitable site for development of new housing being within defensible boundaries of the village and available to be delivered within 1-5 years, the Council's new spatial policy eliminates this site?
Crest Nicholson, second time National Builder of the Year, have a vision statement that identifies the benefits and opportunities to Blackmore for the development of site 076. I believe it can be proven that it falls within national policy and guidance. This site is achievable and could assist with the five year housing suppy. This complies with site selection para 7.29 "The fourth tier allows for limited greenfield sites in the GB which comprise urban extensions within reach of services and infrastructure and with defensible boundaries".
16. Travel by non-car modes
It is not reasonable to have a policy para. 7.62 that requires: "the ability to travel by non-car modes" in a Borough with an extensive rural community. This again demonstrates extreme bias and a lack of consideration for assuring the future viability of the Borough's rural villages in the north. Furthermore if development is to be limited to areas where non-car modes exist, then the local plan will be spatially inequitable... as this draft is.
Thank you for re-considering these points and re-examining the draft plan.
Support
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15158
Received: 28/04/2016
Respondent: CEG Land Promotions Limited
Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd
Strongly support policy in its identification of Dunton Hills Garden Village as a new self-sustaining community offering a mix of associated and integrated uses.
Support the requirement to produce a Masterplan for the site. Suggest master planning for the site should progress rapidly from the work already undertaken.
The aims of paragraphs 7.5 and 7.6 can be achieved by concentration of development on the single Dunton Hills site.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15260
Received: 29/04/2016
Respondent: Tesco Stores Limited
Agent: GL Hearn
Consider the levels of development within the Plan at Strategic Site Dunton Hills Garden Village to be completely unrealistic based upon reasons relating to:
- Suggested phasing as set out in Appendix 2. These completion rates are overly ambitious.
- Joint-working under the duty to co-operate is essential to bring the site forward. It is considered vital that the whole Strategic Site opportunity is fully embraced by both Local Plans, at present this is not the case, and therefore the contribution of the Strategic Site to Brentwood housing target is questionable.
- Lead-in period to the commencement of development would be expected to be several years.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15336
Received: 05/05/2016
Respondent: Ford Motor Company
Agent: Iceni Projects Limited
In March 2015 Ford submitted representations to the joint consultation. At this stage, Ford raised significant concerns regarding this strategic allocation across to the administrative boundaries of the two local authorities. For the reasons set out in the objection to the Dunton Garden Suburb, Ford maintains an objection to the strategic allocation at the Dunton Hills Garden Village due to the perceived wider impact on Ford's operational facility and strategic site at the Dunton Technical Centre in Dunton, Basildon. Ford has also emphasised these concerns in response to the strategic allocation included in the Draft Basildon Borough Council Local Plan.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15363
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Maylands Green Estate Co. Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
Serious questions remain regarding the deliverability of the Dunton Hills Garden Village and the cooperation between Basildon Borough Council and Brentwood Borough Council appears to have ceased following the consultation on the Strategic Growth Options and Dunton Garden Suburb Consultation in early 2015.
The proposal for the Dunton Hills Garden Village is not sustainable and insufficient justification for its allocation has not been provided.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15364
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Maylands Green Estate Co. Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
The fact that the area annotated in the Basildon Borough Council Draft Local Plan H10b is not to be allocated until after 2034 is of serious detriment to Brentwood's own allocation and would result in Dunton Hills Garden Village sitting as an isolated development. It is highly unlikely, given the land ownership, infrastructure and other essential requirements and to ensure that this does not come forward as piecemeal development that the allocation could feasibly be delivered within the Plan period. As a result, the figures set out within Policy 5.2 do not meet the Objectively Assessed Needs of the plan period.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15365
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Maylands Green Estate Co. Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
Council's Green Belt Assessment has commented that the proposed development would effectively harm three of the four purposes of the Green Belt - it would result in unrestricted sprawl of an urban area; significantly reduce the gap between West Horndon and Basildon; and encroach on the countryside. It's only positive attribute is that it does not impact on the setting or special character of historic towns.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15366
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Maylands Green Estate Co. Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
It is noted that representations were made to the Council during the last consultation which raised serious doubts over the deliverability of a proposed station at Dunton due to the proximity of other stations, Network Rail's technical requirements and viability issues. This does not appear to have been resolved within this version of the Draft Local Plan. Without a station, the site is solely dependent on travel by car, resulting in a highly unsustainable development.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15367
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Maylands Green Estate Co. Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
The development at Dunton would not assist in meeting existing settlement specific housing and socio-economic needs in the Borough, especially in the villages throughout Brentwood.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15368
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Maylands Green Estate Co. Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
The key characteristics of a garden village are that it forms the expansion of existing small settlements, is within the catchment of a town, located on an existing transport corridor and is partly or mostly self-sufficient in terms of local social infrastructure. The Dunton Hills proposal cannot meet three of the four characteristics identified above.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15369
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Maylands Green Estate Co. Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
There is no evidence of the financial viability of the Dunton Hills development. Whilst it is accepted that the proposal will prove to be a vital source of housing, the ability to fund significant new capital infrastructure will be extremely limiting. The Council should be aware that the recent consultation on the Lower Thames Crossing included a proposed Route 4, which passes through the Dunton Hills area. However, this is unlikely to come forward as a result of the A127 and the junction with the roundabout at the M25 being at capacity. Essex County Council has already acknowledged that the A127 is one of the busiest non-trunk roads in the Country, with regular extensive and widespread delay and disruption to traffic and on the local road network.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15370
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Maylands Green Estate Co. Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
Of principle concern to the delivery of the Dunton Hills Garden Village is the located of the designated Flood Zone 2. Identification of the site fails to comply with Paragraph 100 of the NPPF, which requires that Local Plans are submitted by Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and that Local Plans should apply a sequential, risk-based approach to the location of development. The Strategic Flood Risk Assessment found in the Evidence Base was published in 2011, prior to the identification of the Dunton Hills Garden Village site. The SFRA provides a list of recommendations within Paragraph 7.1 in regard to the inclusion of sites. It states that "should the Council wish to allocate sites with an identified flood risk, then the policy should either be to avoid the areas of flood risk or to assess the risk in more detail through either Level 2 SFRA work or on a specific site level".
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15383
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Robert Mulholland & Co Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
Serious questions remain regarding the deliverability of the Dunton Hills Garden Village and the cooperation between Basildon Borough Council and Brentwood Borough Council appears to have ceased following the consultation on the Strategic Growth Options and Dunton Garden Suburb Consultation in early 2015.
The proposal for the Dunton Hills Garden Village is not sustainable and insufficient justification for its allocation has not been provided.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15384
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Robert Mulholland & Co Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
The fact that the area annotated in the Basildon Borough Council Draft Local Plan H10b is not to be allocated until after 2034 is of serious detriment to Brentwood's own allocation and would result in Dunton Hills Garden Village sitting as an isolated development. It is highly unlikely, given the land ownership, infrastructure and other essential requirements and to ensure that this does not come forward as piecemeal development that the allocation could feasibly be delivered within the Plan period. As a result, the figures set out within Policy 5.2 do not meet the Objectively Assessed Needs of the plan period.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15385
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Robert Mulholland & Co Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
Council's Green Belt Assessment has commented that the proposed development would effectively harm three of the four purposes of the Green Belt - it would result in unrestricted sprawl of an urban area; significantly reduce the gap between West Horndon and Basildon; and encroach on the countryside. It's only positive attribute is that it does not impact on the setting or special character of historic towns.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15386
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Robert Mulholland & Co Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
It is noted that representations were made to the Council during the last consultation which raised serious doubts over the deliverability of a proposed station at Dunton due to the proximity of other stations, Network Rail's technical requirements and viability issues. This does not appear to have been resolved within this version of the Draft Local Plan. Without a station, the site is solely dependent on travel by car, resulting in a highly unsustainable development.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15387
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Robert Mulholland & Co Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
The development at Dunton would not assist in meeting existing settlement specific housing and socio-economic needs in the Borough, especially in the villages throughout Brentwood.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15388
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Robert Mulholland & Co Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
The key characteristics of a garden village are that it forms the expansion of existing small settlements, is within the catchment of a town, located on an existing transport corridor and is partly or mostly self-sufficient in terms of local social infrastructure. The Dunton Hills proposal cannot meet three of the four characteristics identified above.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15389
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Robert Mulholland & Co Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
There is no evidence of the financial viability of the Dunton Hills development. Whilst it is accepted that the proposal will prove to be a vital source of housing, the ability to fund significant new capital infrastructure will be extremely limiting. The Council should be aware that the recent consultation on the Lower Thames Crossing included a proposed Route 4, which passes through the Dunton Hills area. However, this is unlikely to come forward as a result of the A127 and the junction with the roundabout at the M25 being at capacity. Essex County Council has already acknowledged that the A127 is one of the busiest non-trunk roads in the Country, with regular extensive and widespread delay and disruption to traffic and on the local road network.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15390
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: Robert Mulholland & Co Ltd
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
Of principle concern to the delivery of the Dunton Hills Garden Village is the located of the designated Flood Zone 2. Identification of the site fails to comply with Paragraph 100 of the NPPF, which requires that Local Plans are submitted by Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and that Local Plans should apply a sequential, risk-based approach to the location of development. The Strategic Flood Risk Assessment found in the Evidence Base was published in 2011, prior to the identification of the Dunton Hills Garden Village site. The SFRA provides a list of recommendations within Paragraph 7.1 in regard to the inclusion of sites. It states that "should the Council wish to allocate sites with an identified flood risk, then the policy should either be to avoid the areas of flood risk or to assess the risk in more detail through either Level 2 SFRA work or on a specific site level".
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15412
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: JTS Partnership LLP
Serious questions remain regarding the deliverability of the Dunton Hills Garden Village and the cooperation between Basildon Borough Council and Brentwood Borough Council appears to have ceased following the consultation on the Strategic Growth Options and Dunton Garden Suburb Consultation in early 2015.
The proposal for the Dunton Hills Garden Village is not sustainable and insufficient justification for its allocation has not been provided.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15413
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: JTS Partnership LLP
The fact that the area annotated in the Basildon Borough Council Draft Local Plan H10b is not to be allocated until after 2034 is of serious detriment to Brentwood's own allocation and would result in Dunton Hills Garden Village sitting as an isolated development. It is highly unlikely, given the land ownership, infrastructure and other essential requirements and to ensure that this does not come forward as piecemeal development that the allocation could feasibly be delivered within the Plan period. As a result, the figures set out within Policy 5.2 do not meet the Objectively Assessed Needs of the plan period.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15414
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: JTS Partnership LLP
Council's Green Belt Assessment has commented that the proposed development would effectively harm three of the four purposes of the Green Belt - it would result in unrestricted sprawl of an urban area; significantly reduce the gap between West Horndon and Basildon; and encroach on the countryside. It's only positive attribute is that it does not impact on the setting or special character of historic towns.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15415
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: JTS Partnership LLP
It is noted that representations were made to the Council during the last consultation which raised serious doubts over the deliverability of a proposed station at Dunton due to the proximity of other stations, Network Rail's technical requirements and viability issues. This does not appear to have been resolved within this version of the Draft Local Plan. Without a station, the site is solely dependent on travel by car, resulting in a highly unsustainable development.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15416
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: JTS Partnership LLP
The development at Dunton would not assist in meeting existing settlement specific housing and socio-economic needs in the Borough, especially in the villages throughout Brentwood.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15417
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: JTS Partnership LLP
The key characteristics of a garden village are that it forms the expansion of existing small settlements, is within the catchment of a town, located on an existing transport corridor and is partly or mostly self-sufficient in terms of local social infrastructure. The Dunton Hills proposal cannot meet three of the four characteristics identified above.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15418
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: JTS Partnership LLP
There is no evidence of the financial viability of the Dunton Hills development. Whilst it is accepted that the proposal will prove to be a vital source of housing, the ability to fund significant new capital infrastructure will be extremely limiting. The Council should be aware that the recent consultation on the Lower Thames Crossing included a proposed Route 4, which passes through the Dunton Hills area. However, this is unlikely to come forward as a result of the A127 and the junction with the roundabout at the M25 being at capacity. Essex County Council has already acknowledged that the A127 is one of the busiest non-trunk roads in the Country, with regular extensive and widespread delay and disruption to traffic and on the local road network.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15419
Received: 06/05/2016
Respondent: JTS Partnership LLP
Of principle concern to the delivery of the Dunton Hills Garden Village is the located of the designated Flood Zone 2. Identification of the site fails to comply with Paragraph 100 of the NPPF, which requires that Local Plans are submitted by Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and that Local Plans should apply a sequential, risk-based approach to the location of development. The Strategic Flood Risk Assessment found in the Evidence Base was published in 2011, prior to the identification of the Dunton Hills Garden Village site. The SFRA provides a list of recommendations within Paragraph 7.1 in regard to the inclusion of sites. It states that "should the Council wish to allocate sites with an identified flood risk, then the policy should either be to avoid the areas of flood risk or to assess the risk in more detail through either Level 2 SFRA work or on a specific site level".
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15488
Received: 09/05/2016
Respondent: Mr Richard Lunnon
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
Serious questions remain regarding the deliverability of the Dunton Hills Garden Village and the cooperation between Basildon Borough Council and Brentwood Borough Council appears to have ceased following the consultation on the Strategic Growth Options and Dunton Garden Suburb Consultation in early 2015.
The proposal for the Dunton Hills Garden Village is not sustainable and insufficient justification for its allocation has not been provided.
See attached
Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15489
Received: 09/05/2016
Respondent: Mr Richard Lunnon
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
The fact that the area annotated in the Basildon Borough Council Draft Local Plan H10b is not to be allocated until after 2034 is of serious detriment to Brentwood's own allocation and would result in Dunton Hills Garden Village sitting as an isolated development. It is highly unlikely, given the land ownership, infrastructure and other essential requirements and to ensure that this does not come forward as piecemeal development that the allocation could feasibly be delivered within the Plan period. As a result, the figures set out within Policy 5.2 do not meet the Objectively Assessed Needs of the plan period.
See attached