Policy 7.3: Residential Density

Showing comments and forms 1 to 13 of 13

Comment

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 13299

Received: 10/03/2016

Respondent: Mrs Fiona Trott

Representation Summary:

The site [an area of 9.7ha of land in Chelmsford Road] would be suitable for development by 250 houses, adopting a density of 26dph which is that assumed for the adjoining site at Officer's Meadow. This level of planned development would reduce by over 25% the Council's reliance on windfall site in the later years of the local plan.

Full text:

The site would be suitable for development by 250 houses, adopting a density of 26dph which is that assumed for the adjoining site at Officer's Meadow. This level of planned development would reduce by over 25% the Council's reliance on windfall site in the later years of the local plan.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 13303

Received: 11/02/2016

Respondent: Ms Jenny Downs

Representation Summary:

Should move away from the policy of allowing flats to built in Brentwood.
Brentwood is a family town which needs family housing.
The development around the station is a ghetto with a transient population. The Sawyers Grove development is an excellent example of a great scheme.
The central area of Brentwood is already extremely congested at peak times.

Full text:

Please can the planning department move away from their policy to allow flats to built all over Brentwood. Brentwood is a family town and we need family housing. Planners should be guiding developers and encouraging them to build family homes. The station area development is very much a ghetto with a transient population. The Sawyers Grove development is an excellent example of a great scheme.

We would favour this type of development for the Wates Way redevelopment - rather than flats.

The central area of Brentwood is already extremely congested at peak times.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 13686

Received: 23/03/2016

Respondent: Mr Sasha Millwood

Representation Summary:

These proposed densities are too low. There should be an explicit presumption in favour of high-density development across the board, including outwith town centres. Even in rural areas, there must be a presumption against new detached and semi-detached housing. Current policies on densities date from 2011, at a time of recession when the housing market was slower. The priority now should be to make the most efficient possible use of land.

Full text:

These proposed densities are too low. There should be an explicit presumption in favour of high-density development across the board, including outwith town centres. Even in rural areas, there must be a presumption against new detached and semi-detached housing. Current policies on densities date from 2011, at a time of recession when the housing market was slower. The priority now should be to make the most efficient possible use of land.

Comment

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 13917

Received: 06/04/2016

Respondent: Mr Ian Blackburn

Representation Summary:

The policy on density perhaps needs to be elaborated upon more specific and revised upwards to make efficient use of land. The use of 'special character of the surrounding area' and 'other site constraints' and the way the densities are specified in the policy are very broad.
The policy would be more robust if it went some way in defining general expectations and in refining designations where an exception may apply. Such exceptions could be based generally on site location relative to conservation areas, defined edges of the community, green spaces, surrounding densities etc.
The greater of one and half times surrounding densities and
 Villages generally 35 dwellings/hectare net
 Suburban generally 40 dwellings /hectare net
 Urban areas generally 50 dwellings /hectare net
With centres of these being 1.5 time these densities.
For example a recent small development of flats in Station Road at West Horndon yields a density of 80 dwellings/hectare net. Whilst such small sites can yield disproportionately high densities it does demonstrate how density within even rural settings can be accommodated.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Support

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 14019

Received: 08/04/2016

Respondent: Glenda Fleming

Representation Summary:

Support. The proposals need to be sympathetic to the local character whilst making efficient use of the land, but prescriptive figures should not be applied.

Full text:

See two attached comment sheets.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 14059

Received: 11/04/2016

Respondent: J M Gillingham

Representation Summary:

The policy on density perhaps needs to be elaborated upon more specific and revised upwards to make efficient use of land. The use of 'special character of the surrounding area' and 'other site constraints' and the way the densities are specified in the policy are very broad.
The policy would be more robust if it went some way in defining general expectations and in refining designations where an exception may apply. Such exceptions could be based generally on site location relative to conservation areas, defined edges of the community, green spaces, surrounding densities etc.
The greater of one and half times surrounding densities and
 Villages generally 35 dwellings/hectare net
 Suburban generally 40 dwellings /hectare net
 Urban areas generally 50 dwellings /hectare net
With centres of these being 1.5 time these densities.
For example a recent small development of flats in Station Road at West Horndon yields a density of 80 dwellings/hectare net. Whilst such small sites can yield disproportionately high densities it does demonstrate how density within even rural settings can be accommodated.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Support

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 14680

Received: 20/04/2016

Respondent: Hermes Fund Managers Limited

Agent: McGough Planning Consultants

Representation Summary:

Providing a strong guide for a minimum density of development is broadly welcomed, but only insofar as it does not stifle the best design solution - design should always be led by site constraints and viability concerns rather than the simple imposition of density targets. This is illustrated by our client's emerging masterplans for the redevelopment of the Horndon Estate, where the development density for the housing element is 28.4 dwelling per hectare. Even so, this result in an additional 324 houses, of varying sizes, and reflects West Horndon's existing development density.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Support

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 14985

Received: 26/04/2016

Respondent: Ursuline Sisters

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

Representation Summary:

This policy is supported in general. However the consideration of site constraints which might affect achieved densities should include the ability of the proposal, at density levels specified by policy, to be adequately served by existing or improved infrastructure.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Support

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 15161

Received: 28/04/2016

Respondent: CEG Land Promotions Limited

Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd

Representation Summary:

It is the correct approach to ensure that proposals for new residential development should take a design led approach to density, making schemes sympathetic to local character and making efficient use of land.
The provision of housing in the context of a carefully master planned new self-community will achieve this aim with ease.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Support

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 15348

Received: 05/05/2016

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Colliers International

Representation Summary:

We support the design-led approach proposed by the Council in respect of residential density and the indicative numbers of dwellings per hectare set out by the policy. We also welcome that flexibility is afforded where the special character of the surrounding area or other site constraints make such densities unachievable.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 15799

Received: 11/05/2016

Respondent: Persimmon Homes Essex

Representation Summary:

Support the minimum density policy. However if developers can demonstrate that a site can take a higher density without causing significant harm to the landscape then this could be supported to ensure effective use is achieved.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Support

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 15950

Received: 12/05/2016

Respondent: CALA Homes

Agent: JB Planning Associates Ltd.

Representation Summary:

We support the flexibility to allow higher residential densities in sustainable locations with good public transport accessibility.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Draft Local Plan

Representation ID: 16490

Received: 19/05/2016

Respondent: CPREssex

Agent: Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) Brentwood Branch

Representation Summary:

Regarding densities in rural and semi rural Greenbelt areas these should be low densities and should not exceed 20 dwellings per hectare and could be significantly lower depending on the location. This should be stated explicitly in the LDP.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments: