Appendix 3: Housing Trajectory

Showing comments and forms 1 to 8 of 8

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Representation ID: 231

Received: 29/09/2013

Respondent: Basildon Borough Council

Representation Summary:

Appendix 3 identifies Brentwood Borough's housing trajectory. The housing trajectory includes sites that have built from 2012. The plan period for the Brentwood Local Plan is stated as being 2015-2030, therefore Basildon Borough Council would question why the Plan is relying on the delivery of sites from outside the plan period (2012-2014) to help meet the delivery of 3,500 dwellings that are supposed to be delivered within it.

Full text:

See attachment

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Representation ID: 581

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Hansteen Holdings Plc

Agent: McGough Planning Consultants

Representation Summary:

Phasing assumptions for both Hansteen and Threadneedle's sites are shown as contributing 50 dwellings per year from 2017/18 to 2021/22. It is likely Hansteen's estate will become available in lots over the next few years (rather than as whole). Parcels could be available for redevelopment to housing as early as 2015. The assumed rate of development in good housing sites can reach 1.25-1.5 dwellings per month, which could result in 65-70+ houses per year. Clarification sought about how flexible the LPA would be in the event the development sites became available sooner and on the density and rates of development.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Comment

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Representation ID: 662

Received: 25/09/2013

Respondent: Threadneedle Property Investments Ltd

Agent: Barton Willmore

Representation Summary:

Site 020 would be available and deliverable in the financial year 2015/2016, therefore the trajectory should be brought forward to 2015/16-2019/20. Suggest the annual construction on site is increased to 64+ dwellings per annum (320 over five years) to reflect comments below regarding density.

The Plan suggests approximately 250 dwellings could be constructed on Site 020 (equivalent 39 dwellings per hectare). However, because this site is close to the settlement centre and train station, a greater density could be achieved. The Council should increase the approximate density to a minimum of 320 dwellings (equivalent of 50 dwellings per hectare).

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Representation ID: 799

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Crest Nicholson

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Insufficient consideration is given to the significant negative socio-economic effects suggested in the SA as being resultant of under-delivery of housing. This concern is even greater when the likely timeline for delivery of the strategic allocation at West Horndon is considered. We therefore assume that given the level of infrastructure improvements that will be necessary to support the substantial growth in the village and the inadequacy of existing services and infrastructure, it is unlikely that any homes will be delivered until the last 5 years of the Plan, at the earliest. Surely this would exacerbate the 'significant negative socio-economic effects'

Full text:

See attached Report.

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Representation ID: 906

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: Crest Nicholson

Agent: Savills UK

Representation Summary:

BBC's Housing Trajectory is not capable of demonstrating a 5 year housing supply. If BBC were to adopt a NPPF compliant housing target more in line with the acknowledged objectively assessed need within the Borough, the position would be considerably worse still.

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Representation ID: 1029

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Mr M Ashley

Representation Summary:

Object to Appendix 3.

Full text:

Object to:
Primarily - CP4: West Horndon Opportunity Area & Supporting Documents
plus the following in connection with impact on West Horndon;
S2: Amount & Distribution of Residential Development
CP3: Strategic Sites 020 / 021 / 037
DM11: New Development in the Green Belt
DM17: Wildlife and Nature Conservation
DM24: Affordable Housing
DM28: Gypsy and Traveller Provision
DM35: Flood Risk
Appendix 3: Housing Trajectory

Comments (please use additional sheet if required):
The Brentwood Borough Local Plan 2015-2030 and supporting documents are in sufficiently detailed with information to justify the disproportionate allocation of 43% of the borough housing requirement and 70% of Gypsy and Traveller pitches to be allocated to the village of West Horndon. These numbers will treble the current size of the village whilst decimating a large area of Green Belt. We as villagers did not receive the promised feedback from the 2011 consultation and previously discounted areas of Greenfield have now been put back into the LDP without explanation despite strong resident opposition to Green Belt development. The character of the village will be irreparably damaged by such a huge development and change our village status to a small town with none of the amenities. I am being expected to make a decision on the future of my neighbourhood with limited information which is wholly unacceptable.

The LDP fails to state how and when the local road, education, health, rail and utility infrastructure will be improved to accommodate such an aggressive development and from where the necessary funding has been secured. It would be irresponsible to proceed without detailed planning for such vital associated services. There is no further rail capacity available and the route does not provide access to our borough. The housing trajectory shows a staged construction of houses yet there is no evidence of a demand for house building in the area as potential sites have been left undeveloped in Station Road and on the Elliott's site for several years. Affordable and social housing is not ideally situated in rural areas such as West Horndon and the new development is unlikely to comprise of properties similar to the family homes that dominate the village demographic. Traffic at its peak causes congestion along Station road when trying to exit onto the already dangerous and packed A128. (numerous accidents have occurred at this junction before and after highways made changes and adding further traffic will raise the risks further )
The LDP gives no consideration to the wider implications from other developments in the vicinity, such as the DP World port and proposed A2 Thames crossing, both of which will dramatically increase traffic in the area and place further burdens on the Borough's infrastructure without the additional traffic from the proposed West Horndon development. There are only two routes into Brentwood from West Horndon (A128 / Warley) and access to the area will be gridlocked.
Green Belt development is designed to halt the sprawl of London and should only be in exceptional cases. In the evidence documents on the BBC website the projected population increase for Brentwood is primarily migratory. I see absolutely no reason why the Green Belt should be threatened by movement of people which, by its very nature, can settle on non green belt locations. The wildlife in the area will be adversely affected by the proposed development on Green Belt and I must question whether investigation has been made into protected species which inhabit the area such as Great Crested Newts as there is no mention in the LDP.
The Environmental Agency lists areas 020, 021 and 037 as being on flood plain as borne out by the most recent flooding incidents in 2012. The village suffers from flooding or near flooding on a regular basis in this area with no plans to remove the risk of further flooding once the development has been started it will only get worse. There is no evidence that this factor has been considered in the LDP and to site traveller and gypsy pitches on a flood plain is unacceptable.
I do not believe that the LDP is sound or robust enough to be considered in its present form and appears to be a rash decision to fulfil government targets. I acknowledge that progress must be made and that some development may be necessary and this should be made in smaller numbers to keep the village in its status. However, much more investigation needs to be undertaken by the council and the views of the community considered in depth before any decisions are made that will affect us in the long term.

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Representation ID: 3391

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Crest Nicholson

Agent: Savills UK

Representation Summary:

BBC's Housing Trajectory is not capable of demonstrating a 5 year housing supply. If BBC were to adopt a NPPF compliant housing target more in line with the acknowledged objectively assessed need within the Borough, the position would be considerably worse still.

Full text:

See Attached

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Representation ID: 3402

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Chelmsford Diocesan Board of Finance

Agent: Strutt & Parker LLP

Representation Summary:

In conclusion, the Council is not meeting its OAN and a proportionate evidence base has not been used to identify sites which are critical to the delivery of the housing strategy. Given these considerations I think it would be fair to assume that the housing trajectory is unlikely to represent an accurate reflection of the expected rate of housing delivery.

Full text:

See Attachment

Attachments: