Brook Green version 2

There is now a new hybrid planning application submitted by the developer for a smaller number of premises (up to 120) under reference 18/01065/OUT. This means that the whole process of commenting and objecting starts again so the advice below still stands, so please do write in the the council and let your opinions be known.

Brook Green 2 area outline

 

DO:

  • USE REFERENCE 18/01065/OUT
  • USE COUNCIL OR GOVENRMENT PLANNING POLICY AND SAY WHY THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT MEET THE TESTS/ COMPLY WITH POLICY
  • BE SPECIFIC RATHER THAN GIVING GENERAL EXAMPLES
  • SEND INDIVIDUAL RESPONSES NOT STANDARD LETTERS
  • SEND A SEPARATE LETTER FOR EVERY PERSON WHO OBJECTS RATHER THAN HOUSEHOLDS
  • EMAIL YOUR REPLY TO planning@braintree.gov.uk OR SEND A LETTER TO Development Management, Causeway House, Braintree CM7 9HP OR REGISTER ONLINE ON BRAINTREE DC PLANNING SITE TO MAKE COMMENTS
  • MAKE SURE YOU INCLUDE YOUR FULL NAME AND POSTAL ADDRESS. The details will be redacted but if you don’t include them then the objection won’t count.

DON’T:

  • JUST SIGN A PETITION (ALTHOUGH DO DO THAT TOO LINKS AVAILABLE), IT HAS LITTLE WEIGHT, YOU MUST WRITE
  • COMPLAIN ON GROUNDS IRRELEVANT TO PLANNING LAW EG THE NOISE/DISRUPTION OF BUILDING, EFFECT OF HOUSE VALUE, ABILITY TO WALK ACROSS PRIVATE FIELDS, VIEWS ETC
  • THINK THAT THIS IS FUTILE – IF YOU DON’T TAKE THE TIME TO OBJECT YOU CANNOT COMPLAIN IF THE DEVELOPMENT GOES AHEAD

Some arguments against this development

  1. An emerging local plan is under way. This is a democratic process which has full local consultation and is designed to represent the views of the local community. It matters. In the emerging local plan this site has been considered and rejected on planning grounds as being unsuitable for development.
  2. Is this a case of a predatory developer seeking to take advantage of the fact that the local plan is not finalised to force through development that is not sound on planning grounds? The developer failed to even turn up to the Parish Council meeting when this was discussed despite being invited. It is the same developer as has made the Brook Green application which is currently under appeal.
  3. This land is designated as part of a green buffer zone in the emerging local plan (para 8.31 and 8.32). It plays an important function as such.
  4. Braintree District Council’s own core strategy states that the council, in planning decisions shall seek “To protect, restore and enhance the natural habitats, biodiversity, landscape character, amenity and environmental quality of the countryside and the open spaces and green corridors within towns and villages. Apart from the identified Growth Locations, the open countryside between the Main Towns, and Villages should be kept undeveloped.” For that reason this land was not part of the Council’s core strategy.
  5. National Planning Policy states that development should enhance the local community. This development would significantly and demonstrably outweigh any benefit of the development.
  6. The Council has policies specifically to prevent the coalescence (merging) of Braintree, Rayne and Notley. The Braintree District Settlement Fringes Evaluation of Landscape Analysis Study of Braintree and environmental report prepared for Braintree District Council and dated June 2015 stated Parcels in the intervening areas between Braintree and Rayne has typically been assessed as having a Medium-Low capacity to accommodate future developmentOnly land assessed as medium-high should be used, or certainly be used first.
  7. The Flitch Way is a Country Park, an area for people to visit and enjoy recreation in a countryside environment predominantly natural or semi-natural landscape. Do you value the landscape north of the Flitch way where this would go? Would this development affect your enjoyment of using it? It currently contributes to the physical and mental health and wellbeing of the community as a much used, free and accessible facility to exercise in open countryside. Would it much more urbanised and more like a path past a housing estate with all the extra noise?
  8. It is deemed as a Suitable Accessible Natural Greenspace (SANG). A SANG must have ‘no unpleasant intrusions’ and should provide ‘naturalistic space with areas of open countryside and areas of dense and scattered trees and shrubs. Would that remain the case if this development went ahead?
  9. Can the local roads cope with the extra cars generated by this development?
  10. There is no school and no doctors surgery planned, nor any bus service planned to service this estate. Is that acceptable to you?
  11. The real danger is that, should this smaller development be permitted, the developer would then use it as a basis to justify further development south of the Flitch way arguing that it is already an urbanised area….little by little he would build the full Brook Green by stealth.