Object

Representation ID: 305

Received: 11/09/2013

Respondent: Epping Forest District Council

(1) Epping Forest Council is not convinced that Brentwood Council has adequately justified its position that it is unable to make full provision for its objectively assessed housing needs - at the very least, it should undertake a comprehensive Green Belt boundary review and identify and assess in detail potential mitigation measures;
(2) The Preferred Options document makes no reference to joint working as encouraged by para 179 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Consequently there is no indication of how Brentwood intends to try to make provision for the outstanding number (2,100) of new dwellings outside the Borough boundary;
(3) Experience elsewhere has already shown that there is a greater risk of the Local Plan being challenged on soundness grounds, as it has not been "positively prepared" in accordance with para 182 of the National Planning Policy Framework;
(4) Because of the lack of justification and (a) the need to meet its own objectively assessed housing figure; (b) significant environmental and infrastructure constraints; and (c) being in a different Housing Market Area, Epping Forest Council is not in a position to make any provision for Brentwood's unmet housing needs;
5. Further traveller provision in the West Horndon area, as part of a mixed-use development, is noted.

Comment

Representation ID: 306

Received: 11/09/2013

Respondent: Epping Forest District Council

The Preferred Options document makes no reference to joint working as encouraged by para 179 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Comment

Representation ID: 307

Received: 11/09/2013

Respondent: Epping Forest District Council

Provision for the travelling community in the Navestock/Stapleford Abbotts area should be jointly monitored, taking into account the relative isolation of the area from local services and facilities. Further provision in the West Horndon area, as part of a mixed-use development, is noted.

Comment

Representation ID: 308

Received: 11/09/2013

Respondent: Epping Forest District Council

To note (a) the proposed jobs growth figure of 5,400 between 2015 and 2030 and to advise that the stated annual growth figure of 285 will not reach the target - the correct figure should be 360; and (b) the allocation of an additional 31ha as employment land including a substantial site at J29 of the M25 (Brentwood Enterprise Park).

Comment

Representation ID: 309

Received: 11/09/2013

Respondent: Epping Forest District Council

To suggest that the Submission version of the Plan should contain a more detailed analysis of the implications of Crossrail, including the prospects for housing provision on any sites that may become available for redevelopment is noted.