8.1

Showing comments and forms 1 to 2 of 2

Object

Brentwood Local Plan 2016 - 2033 (Pre-Submission, Regulation 19)

Representation ID: 22241

Received: 10/03/2019

Respondent: Mr Anthony Cross

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Inclusion of site allocations R25 and R26 in the LDP are inappropriate, unsound and not compliant with legal requirements on the following grounds: failure to prove that more suitable (brownfield) sites do not exist in the borough, or that other site allocations couldn't absorb the 70 dwellings proposed; inadequate consultation with Epping Forest District Council and failure to properly consider the impact of other nearby developments on Blackmore; failure to recognise the increased flood risk resulting from the proposed development; adverse impact on roads, noise levels and safety of existing road users from increased traffic; inadequate local amenities/services; other considerations per full representation.

Change suggested by respondent:

Removal of proposed developments R25 and R26 from the plan and reallocation of the 70 dwellings to more suitable brownfield sites in the borough.

Full text:

Inclusion of site allocations R25 and R26 in the LDP are inappropriate, unsound and not compliant with legal requirements on the following grounds: failure to prove that more suitable (brownfield) sites do not exist in the borough, or that other site allocations couldn't absorb the 70 dwellings proposed; inadequate consultation with Epping Forest District Council and failure to properly consider the impact of other nearby developments on Blackmore; failure to recognise the increased flood risk resulting from the proposed development; adverse impact on roads, noise levels and safety of existing road users from increased traffic; inadequate local amenities/services; other considerations per full representation.

Object

Brentwood Local Plan 2016 - 2033 (Pre-Submission, Regulation 19)

Representation ID: 22605

Received: 19/03/2019

Respondent: Dr Philip Gibbs

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Dunton Hills is an important unspoilt area for wildlife an biodiversity and should be conserved as required by legislation protecting wildlife habitats and national planning policy. An impact study should have been done before taking a decision to allow development here.

Change suggested by respondent:

remove Dunton Hills site from spacial strategy

Full text:

The area of Dunoton Hills is a very important wildlife corridor between Thorndon Country Park and Langon Hills Country Park. This was confirmed by Essex Wildlife Trust in their representation submitted to the Dunton Garden Suburb consultation which unfortunately Brentwood Council have not included in the evidence base.

The area is divided into fields whose boundaries have probably not changed for centuries. In the oldest OS maps the boundaries and the positions of ponds and ancient woodland have not changed. the use of ditches and lines of oak trees to mark field boundaries and provide drainage goes back to the anglo-saxon period. Dunton Hills is one of the few places where they remain.

I visited the Dunton Hills area with representatives of the Essex Wildlife Trust in 2015. they identified a rich heritage of wildlife and habitats. There is a barn owl who lives in the woods at the top of the hill near the pond. This shows that there are rodents in the area. I also photographed badgers and foxes and a heron at the pond.

The area around the mardyke tributary is a Local Wildlife Site. It depends on its isolation to serve as a valuable habitat for wildlife. The development will only leave a sterile version of these ancient woods in place where cats and dogs will replace the native fauna.

it is simply not possible to mitigate against the loss of habitats that this development will cause.