Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Search Representations

Results for Charles Fox of Covent Garden search

New search New search

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Policy CP4: West Horndon Opportunity Area

Representation ID: 1447

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Charles Fox of Covent Garden

Representation Summary:

Objects to CP4 because:
- Loss of local employment
- Lead to a rise in car dependency in the area.
- It will further congest the surrounding roads (particularly A127)
- Loss of the industrial estate (020 & 021).

Full text:

I write with reference to the above development as a business at Horndon Industrial Estate; Business Name: Charles H. Fox Ltd.

I wish to strongly object to the proposed development on the following
grounds:

1. Firstly, having purchased this brand new building only five years ago, I am now very concerned as to why Brentwood Council would give planning permission for a development of 10 new warehouses, only to threaten the owners with demolition after such a very short period of time. I was granted a 999 year lease and obviously expected to stay in situ for many, many years.
Brentwood Council MUST have known of this proposed development before my warehouse was built.

2. My decision to purchase in West Horndon was based mainly upon the following reason:
Location: As a resident of WH since 1967 I have chosen my staff carefully from the many people I know in WH. At present I employ 7 full-time staff (including myself) who live in WH. Three other long standing staff use the train to get to WH. We also have a shop in London and easy access to the London premises is essential. We very seldom drive as this is so time consuming and very expensive.
The staff in London also need easy access to the warehouse for many various reasons, hence purchasing a warehouse near to a main line station. Your proposal to re-deploy this estate near the M25 junction 29 is totally unsuitable for my staff and will have a detrimental effect on my business and staff. So much so that if the final outcome were to be compulsory purchase, it is extremely unlikely that we would go to the proposed new sit or remain in Brentwood.

3. Employment: Charles Fox Ltd., and many of the other businesses on the estate rely heavily on local residents for staffing and a huge number of staff use the train to get to and from work. Moving to the M25 will be very time consuming and expensive for existing staff who cannot afford cars. Aren't the local councils supposed to encourage local employment, not destroy it. There has been a working estate in West Horndon for many, many years and it has always provided employment for the villagers. My sister's first job was on the estate and my Mother also worked part-time on the other estate. For young people and Mum's doing part-time work, those who cannot afford or do not want to drive or those who also cannot afford the very high cost of travelling to work by train, this estate provides much needed employment.

Brentwood Council simply MUST consider this very important aspect in their consultations.

Another point on employment, 1500 new homes, must they all have cars or have to take the train, both very expensive, isn't it better to provide MORE work locally? Local employment must NOT be lost.

4. The Estate: This estate is extremely well run, clean, used, infact a very nice busy community in itself.
The Council MUST consider building the new houses elsewhere.

5. Village traffic: It is hardly surprising that the villagers who live in Station Road would be happy to see the Industrial Estates close, the noise they have to put up with during the night is excessive. This could have been easily remedied if the Council had kept to their plans to make a direct access onto the A127 many years ago.

6. Traffic: My staff who drive into WH are always complaining to me about traffic jams in the A127 and are very often late to work due to this. The A127 and surrounding roads simply cannot take much more traffic and 1500 new dwellings in WH will definitely have a grave effect on traffic in the immediate area and beyond. BC MUST take this serious matter into consideration.

The National Planning Policy framework says that local planning authorities should aim to involve all sections of the community in the development of Local Plans and in planning decisions.

It also says that "Early and meaningful engagement and collaboration with neighbourhoods, local organisations and businesses is essential". I would not be at all surprised if many of the businesses on both Industrial Estates have not sent any objections to the proposed developments, because they have not been properly consulted. Apart from my neighbour who found out very late in the day, all the other units along my row of warehouses (8 in all) were completely unaware of these plans until I advised them. They were not made aware by yourselves or the owners of the site, who when questioned, said they new nothing of these plans. ALL businesses should have been notified by yourselves, directly, in writing.

Not to notify them, directly in writing (letters could have been put in with their new rate demands) is extremely bad policy on behalf of Brentwood Council and appears to be underhanded. You have a "Duty of Care" to your business ratepayers and this has not been adhered to.

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Consultation

Representation ID: 1448

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Charles Fox of Covent Garden

Representation Summary:

Objects to the plan as because of the lack of information during the consultation period.

Full text:

I write with reference to the above development as a business at Horndon Industrial Estate; Business Name: Charles H. Fox Ltd.

I wish to strongly object to the proposed development on the following
grounds:

1. Firstly, having purchased this brand new building only five years ago, I am now very concerned as to why Brentwood Council would give planning permission for a development of 10 new warehouses, only to threaten the owners with demolition after such a very short period of time. I was granted a 999 year lease and obviously expected to stay in situ for many, many years.
Brentwood Council MUST have known of this proposed development before my warehouse was built.

2. My decision to purchase in West Horndon was based mainly upon the following reason:
Location: As a resident of WH since 1967 I have chosen my staff carefully from the many people I know in WH. At present I employ 7 full-time staff (including myself) who live in WH. Three other long standing staff use the train to get to WH. We also have a shop in London and easy access to the London premises is essential. We very seldom drive as this is so time consuming and very expensive.
The staff in London also need easy access to the warehouse for many various reasons, hence purchasing a warehouse near to a main line station. Your proposal to re-deploy this estate near the M25 junction 29 is totally unsuitable for my staff and will have a detrimental effect on my business and staff. So much so that if the final outcome were to be compulsory purchase, it is extremely unlikely that we would go to the proposed new sit or remain in Brentwood.

3. Employment: Charles Fox Ltd., and many of the other businesses on the estate rely heavily on local residents for staffing and a huge number of staff use the train to get to and from work. Moving to the M25 will be very time consuming and expensive for existing staff who cannot afford cars. Aren't the local councils supposed to encourage local employment, not destroy it. There has been a working estate in West Horndon for many, many years and it has always provided employment for the villagers. My sister's first job was on the estate and my Mother also worked part-time on the other estate. For young people and Mum's doing part-time work, those who cannot afford or do not want to drive or those who also cannot afford the very high cost of travelling to work by train, this estate provides much needed employment.

Brentwood Council simply MUST consider this very important aspect in their consultations.

Another point on employment, 1500 new homes, must they all have cars or have to take the train, both very expensive, isn't it better to provide MORE work locally? Local employment must NOT be lost.

4. The Estate: This estate is extremely well run, clean, used, infact a very nice busy community in itself.
The Council MUST consider building the new houses elsewhere.

5. Village traffic: It is hardly surprising that the villagers who live in Station Road would be happy to see the Industrial Estates close, the noise they have to put up with during the night is excessive. This could have been easily remedied if the Council had kept to their plans to make a direct access onto the A127 many years ago.

6. Traffic: My staff who drive into WH are always complaining to me about traffic jams in the A127 and are very often late to work due to this. The A127 and surrounding roads simply cannot take much more traffic and 1500 new dwellings in WH will definitely have a grave effect on traffic in the immediate area and beyond. BC MUST take this serious matter into consideration.

The National Planning Policy framework says that local planning authorities should aim to involve all sections of the community in the development of Local Plans and in planning decisions.

It also says that "Early and meaningful engagement and collaboration with neighbourhoods, local organisations and businesses is essential". I would not be at all surprised if many of the businesses on both Industrial Estates have not sent any objections to the proposed developments, because they have not been properly consulted. Apart from my neighbour who found out very late in the day, all the other units along my row of warehouses (8 in all) were completely unaware of these plans until I advised them. They were not made aware by yourselves or the owners of the site, who when questioned, said they new nothing of these plans. ALL businesses should have been notified by yourselves, directly, in writing.

Not to notify them, directly in writing (letters could have been put in with their new rate demands) is extremely bad policy on behalf of Brentwood Council and appears to be underhanded. You have a "Duty of Care" to your business ratepayers and this has not been adhered to.

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Policy CP7: Brentwood Enterprise Park

Representation ID: 1449

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Charles Fox of Covent Garden

Representation Summary:

Objects to the relocation of the West Horndon Industrial Park because:
- Access to the London premises is essential.
- staff in London also needs easy access to the warehouse for many various reasons, hence purchasing a warehouse near to a main line station.
- Your proposal to re-deploy this estate near the M25 junction 29 is totally unsuitable for my staff and will have a detrimental effect on my business and staff.
- Moving to the M25 will be very time consuming and expensive for existing staff who cannot afford cars.

Full text:

I write with reference to the above development as a business at Horndon Industrial Estate; Business Name: Charles H. Fox Ltd.

I wish to strongly object to the proposed development on the following
grounds:

1. Firstly, having purchased this brand new building only five years ago, I am now very concerned as to why Brentwood Council would give planning permission for a development of 10 new warehouses, only to threaten the owners with demolition after such a very short period of time. I was granted a 999 year lease and obviously expected to stay in situ for many, many years.
Brentwood Council MUST have known of this proposed development before my warehouse was built.

2. My decision to purchase in West Horndon was based mainly upon the following reason:
Location: As a resident of WH since 1967 I have chosen my staff carefully from the many people I know in WH. At present I employ 7 full-time staff (including myself) who live in WH. Three other long standing staff use the train to get to WH. We also have a shop in London and easy access to the London premises is essential. We very seldom drive as this is so time consuming and very expensive.
The staff in London also need easy access to the warehouse for many various reasons, hence purchasing a warehouse near to a main line station. Your proposal to re-deploy this estate near the M25 junction 29 is totally unsuitable for my staff and will have a detrimental effect on my business and staff. So much so that if the final outcome were to be compulsory purchase, it is extremely unlikely that we would go to the proposed new sit or remain in Brentwood.

3. Employment: Charles Fox Ltd., and many of the other businesses on the estate rely heavily on local residents for staffing and a huge number of staff use the train to get to and from work. Moving to the M25 will be very time consuming and expensive for existing staff who cannot afford cars. Aren't the local councils supposed to encourage local employment, not destroy it. There has been a working estate in West Horndon for many, many years and it has always provided employment for the villagers. My sister's first job was on the estate and my Mother also worked part-time on the other estate. For young people and Mum's doing part-time work, those who cannot afford or do not want to drive or those who also cannot afford the very high cost of travelling to work by train, this estate provides much needed employment.

Brentwood Council simply MUST consider this very important aspect in their consultations.

Another point on employment, 1500 new homes, must they all have cars or have to take the train, both very expensive, isn't it better to provide MORE work locally? Local employment must NOT be lost.

4. The Estate: This estate is extremely well run, clean, used, infact a very nice busy community in itself.
The Council MUST consider building the new houses elsewhere.

5. Village traffic: It is hardly surprising that the villagers who live in Station Road would be happy to see the Industrial Estates close, the noise they have to put up with during the night is excessive. This could have been easily remedied if the Council had kept to their plans to make a direct access onto the A127 many years ago.

6. Traffic: My staff who drive into WH are always complaining to me about traffic jams in the A127 and are very often late to work due to this. The A127 and surrounding roads simply cannot take much more traffic and 1500 new dwellings in WH will definitely have a grave effect on traffic in the immediate area and beyond. BC MUST take this serious matter into consideration.

The National Planning Policy framework says that local planning authorities should aim to involve all sections of the community in the development of Local Plans and in planning decisions.

It also says that "Early and meaningful engagement and collaboration with neighbourhoods, local organisations and businesses is essential". I would not be at all surprised if many of the businesses on both Industrial Estates have not sent any objections to the proposed developments, because they have not been properly consulted. Apart from my neighbour who found out very late in the day, all the other units along my row of warehouses (8 in all) were completely unaware of these plans until I advised them. They were not made aware by yourselves or the owners of the site, who when questioned, said they new nothing of these plans. ALL businesses should have been notified by yourselves, directly, in writing.

Not to notify them, directly in writing (letters could have been put in with their new rate demands) is extremely bad policy on behalf of Brentwood Council and appears to be underhanded. You have a "Duty of Care" to your business ratepayers and this has not been adhered to.

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

22 West Horndon Strategic Allocation (020, 021 & 037) - (1,500 dwellings)

Representation ID: 1450

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Charles Fox of Covent Garden

Representation Summary:

Objects to Housing Land Allocations 020 & 021. The Estate: This estate is extremely well run, clean, used, infact a very nice busy community in itself. The Council MUST consider building the new houses elsewhere. There has been a working estate in West Horndon for many, many years and it has always provided employment for the villagers. Another point on employment, 1500 new homes, must they all have cars or have to take the train, both very expensive, isn't it better to provide MORE work locally? Local employment must NOT be lost.

Full text:

I write with reference to the above development as a business at Horndon Industrial Estate; Business Name: Charles H. Fox Ltd.

I wish to strongly object to the proposed development on the following
grounds:

1. Firstly, having purchased this brand new building only five years ago, I am now very concerned as to why Brentwood Council would give planning permission for a development of 10 new warehouses, only to threaten the owners with demolition after such a very short period of time. I was granted a 999 year lease and obviously expected to stay in situ for many, many years.
Brentwood Council MUST have known of this proposed development before my warehouse was built.

2. My decision to purchase in West Horndon was based mainly upon the following reason:
Location: As a resident of WH since 1967 I have chosen my staff carefully from the many people I know in WH. At present I employ 7 full-time staff (including myself) who live in WH. Three other long standing staff use the train to get to WH. We also have a shop in London and easy access to the London premises is essential. We very seldom drive as this is so time consuming and very expensive.
The staff in London also need easy access to the warehouse for many various reasons, hence purchasing a warehouse near to a main line station. Your proposal to re-deploy this estate near the M25 junction 29 is totally unsuitable for my staff and will have a detrimental effect on my business and staff. So much so that if the final outcome were to be compulsory purchase, it is extremely unlikely that we would go to the proposed new sit or remain in Brentwood.

3. Employment: Charles Fox Ltd., and many of the other businesses on the estate rely heavily on local residents for staffing and a huge number of staff use the train to get to and from work. Moving to the M25 will be very time consuming and expensive for existing staff who cannot afford cars. Aren't the local councils supposed to encourage local employment, not destroy it. There has been a working estate in West Horndon for many, many years and it has always provided employment for the villagers. My sister's first job was on the estate and my Mother also worked part-time on the other estate. For young people and Mum's doing part-time work, those who cannot afford or do not want to drive or those who also cannot afford the very high cost of travelling to work by train, this estate provides much needed employment.

Brentwood Council simply MUST consider this very important aspect in their consultations.

Another point on employment, 1500 new homes, must they all have cars or have to take the train, both very expensive, isn't it better to provide MORE work locally? Local employment must NOT be lost.

4. The Estate: This estate is extremely well run, clean, used, infact a very nice busy community in itself.
The Council MUST consider building the new houses elsewhere.

5. Village traffic: It is hardly surprising that the villagers who live in Station Road would be happy to see the Industrial Estates close, the noise they have to put up with during the night is excessive. This could have been easily remedied if the Council had kept to their plans to make a direct access onto the A127 many years ago.

6. Traffic: My staff who drive into WH are always complaining to me about traffic jams in the A127 and are very often late to work due to this. The A127 and surrounding roads simply cannot take much more traffic and 1500 new dwellings in WH will definitely have a grave effect on traffic in the immediate area and beyond. BC MUST take this serious matter into consideration.

The National Planning Policy framework says that local planning authorities should aim to involve all sections of the community in the development of Local Plans and in planning decisions.

It also says that "Early and meaningful engagement and collaboration with neighbourhoods, local organisations and businesses is essential". I would not be at all surprised if many of the businesses on both Industrial Estates have not sent any objections to the proposed developments, because they have not been properly consulted. Apart from my neighbour who found out very late in the day, all the other units along my row of warehouses (8 in all) were completely unaware of these plans until I advised them. They were not made aware by yourselves or the owners of the site, who when questioned, said they new nothing of these plans. ALL businesses should have been notified by yourselves, directly, in writing.

Not to notify them, directly in writing (letters could have been put in with their new rate demands) is extremely bad policy on behalf of Brentwood Council and appears to be underhanded. You have a "Duty of Care" to your business ratepayers and this has not been adhered to.

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.