I do not believe building on our greenbelt is ever a viable option, it is not an option to take & these areas issues have been pushed together in bands & not in reasonable urbanisations.

Road and rail infrastructure is already at capacity and in most cases over capacity.
It is not clear why the A127 Corridor has greater potential for improvements than the A12. The A127 is leads to Southend which is a local road and leads to London area where traffic is very heavy. There are houses that run along the edge of the A127 including new developments that are being built within Basildon that are right to the edge of the A127. As such the widening of the A127 is not necessarily easy. The A12 could potentially be expanded in a number of areas without material impact to the surrounding residential properties.
The consultation document implies that the A127 has greater development potential due to it "having a different landscape character". Whilst it does have a different landscape character to the North of the borough, the local residents value of the open space and farmland should not be considered any lower than residents north of the borough. The open fenland landscape is valued extremely highly by local residents, and contributes to an open rural feel to this area and local settlements.
Flood risk is not addressed for any of the sites. It is clearly major problem in the A127 corridor and needs to be addressed before and development decision can be made.

Whilst you state that "it is important to consider allowing villages to grow in order to provide for local need" you also need to consider the local infrastructure of villages. For example Blackmore has one shop. Already this gets incredibly busy with cars parked on the road and corners of the road making it dangerous to pull out onto the main road and cross as a pedestrian - there are no pedestrian crossings. Have you considered how this one shop will support more families - there is no room for expansion? There is only one primary school which is already at capacity - how will this cope with more families moving to the area? Does this mean we have to travel further to send our children to school - not very environmentally friendly; as I understood it one of the Governments key policies is around environment and sustainability - you would be solving one problem and creating another. Equally Blackmore gets a lot of visitors at the weekend, especially in summer months so there are even more cars along with cyclists, walkers etc. It is a busy enough village without adding to it. Nine Ashes has already had new housing built within the last year and Blackmore is fit to bursting with houses and people. Will our rural locations no longer be rural?
You state that "Local roads provide access to connecting A-roads such as the A414, which provides access to the M11 and Chelmsford without driving on the highway network" - this is a total nightmare for Blackmore and Nine Ashes which are both used as a "rat run" / cut through for an increasing number of cars, the majority of whom completely disregard the speed limit imposed. There is a 30mph speed limit outside our house and 90% of cars drive well over this, some at double the speed. This is so dangerous given there is a local primary school which they fly past. We have requested on a number of occasions for speed cameras and footpaths which you have rejected. You are wanting to channel more cars onto the A414 for people to access the M11 etc - the A414 is already packed with cars at rush hour. Equally have you tried to get on a train from Chelmsford or Ingatestone to London during rush hour or even tried to park in the station car parks? They are packed already, how are they going to cope with more people using local stations?
You need to seriously consider the local infrastructure and addressing this if you are considering such areas for housing developments. You can't build houses without the right local infrastructure support as although you will be meeting your targets you will adding to other problems and issues.

A12 Corridor. Whilst I agree with what is stated it should also be included that the further out from the urban areas you go the more woodland, hedgerows, wildlife, natural beauty and tranquility you encompass. Develop too far east and south you will coalesce smaller villages and settlements into the town.

There appears to be very large swathes of farm and woodland between the villages of Ingrave, Herongate and the Bursteads marked out for potential housing development. I assume that woodland, some covered in bluebells in spring, would remain untouched. There are many areas of 'white grass' left by the farmers in these areas that large flocks of Skylarks breed in, a Schedule 1 listed bird.
The area around the Burstead's is a naturally hilly and beautiful area and would need very careful consideration if any of this were to be built on.
Herongate and Ingrave appear to be merged into a large urban area.
How would access be gained to the proposed large areas of development around Ingrave, Herongate and Hutton? It seems that, other than constructing roads right across the proposed areas to Noak Hill Road, this would have to be via the A128 or Running Waters Road, both already heavily trafficked.

Whilst in general these are true - the reality is much more complicated. Building on the land between Ingrave and Brentwood would have major impacts on the road network suggesting that is possible to access the A12 from this area now, let alone after building of many roads is unrealistic. The A128 suffers congestion most days and all it takes is for a single car / van to park on the road and congestions occurs. This can only get worse and is a danger to local residents. I can't see how it is possible to upgrade transport links in this area. I presume the same to be true for the villages at the north of brentwood.

Any major building in the north of the borough will use precious greenbelt land in areas where there are insufficient transport and other services. Building in the West Horndon area (as intended with the Dunton Garden Suburb) would be much better supported.

The strongest support musty be given to the A127 corridor where existing infrastructure, if properly invested in, will give the greatest opportunity for the many.

Benefits in infrastructure and community facilities will enhance the existing West Horndon, which will benefit from the re-siting of the industrial area in favour of sustainable housing.

see attached

As stated in the North the smaller country roads do link the villages to the A12 and A414 but they are country roads and will not be able to cope with the likely increase in traffic, The roads to Shenfield and Brentwood are congested as it is and can only get worse. Although the new developments in the railway structure are welcomed, getting passengers to the stations is likely to become an issue.

Option B the A12 corridor would but even more strain on the A128/127 which is already congested. The character of Brentwood, Warley, Ingrave, Herongate is defined by Greenbelt and Farm land and to destroy this would be to destroy the character of the area and make the area less desirable.
As someone who has migrated down south for work, I chose to live in Ingrave rather than the city because it has a healthy country lifestyle feel about it, the schools were good and I could see raising a family in the area, urbanizing this area would ruin the area.

I agree with some of the issues raised, but not with some of the solutions suggested. In particular, I dissent from proposals to "release" land at the edge of villages, something which strikes me as a recipe for the sort of horrible urban sprawl that the greenbelt is supposed (for good reason) to prevent. Moreover, I am unconvinced by the suggestion that there is greater capacity for "growth" along the A127 corridor.

The A127 already represents a significant barrier for the movement and dispersal of wildlife, particularly between valuable wildlife habitats at Thorndon Woods and Parkland to the north and the Langdon Ridge in the Basildon district to the south. Any development along this transport corridor will serve to increase the impact of this barrier and risks adversely impacting on the biodiversity of these two living landscapes, which are of great importance for maintaining the biodiversity of the area.

Significant conservation efforts would be required to offset such an impact, especially in view of the fact that such development will likely require widening of the A127 to accommodate the increased traffic. It is our view that at least one substantial wildlife bridge spanning the carriageway would be necessary to mitigate the serious adverse impacts of major development along this transport corridor. There are several examples of the successful construction of such "wildlife highways" being undertaken in Europe, particularly in the Netherlands.

In general I agree with the issues raised. I strongly agree that the North of the Borough should NOT be developed and that Green Belt land should not be used. Any building should be kept to a bare minimum, thereby retaining the rural character of the villages.

The A127 corridor is greenbelt land, protecting villages mentioned in the Doomseday Book. The greenbelt was designed to prevent urban sprawl, and it is government policy not to build on greenbelt land.

As mentioned in Q.1, not only have the villages of Herongate and Ingrave been included in the A12 corridor, which gives a false representation of the impact on development of that area - these naturally use the close A127 - but the wording of various points pushes the reader to go along with the idea that the A127 has room for expansion, but the A12 doesn't.

2.15 Transport connections and local facilities are not as good in this part of the Borough - Transport connections via road and rail are good in the A12 corridor area, but not in the A127 corridor area. Because Herongate and Ingrave have been falsely included in the A12 corridor, (although they only have access via A128 and are closer to the small West Horndon c2c line than the Crossrail stations in the North of the borough), it makes it appear as if the A12 is poorly served for public transport, which it isn't. Hutton residents also have the use of nearby Shenfield, and even Billericay station, as well as the A129, and close access to the A12.

2.17 However, in addition there are development opportunities surrounding the urban areas - The use of however leads people to believe it to be a negative, although it states there are development opportunities around the urban areas.

2.18 The A127 Corridor contains the single settlement of West Horndon - As stated repeatedly, the A127 corridor does in fact contain West Horndon, AND Herongate and Ingrave, as they are both closer to the A127 than the A12, and not only use the A127, but are directly affected by events on the A127...whether proposed building work, or the regular accidents caused by it running beyond capacity.

2.19 the capacity for growth is potentially greater than elsewhere in the Borough - The capacity for growth is far more limited, as it doesn't have the high speed rail lines, good quality road, or brownfield sites of the North of the borough. In addition to this, the wording is leading the reader. It doesn't ask a question, it states as fact that there is greater potential for growth, although this is only the biased opinion of the writer who clearly doesn't want development to take place along the true A12 corridor. This goes against the consultation process.

2.19 Although the A127 suffers from congestion problems it has more scope for improvements than the A12 - As above, this is a biased statement presenting the writer's opinion as fact. This should never have been allowed as part of a consulation document.

In addition to this, the A12 is a better quality road, with the advantage of the major transport improvements provided by the Crossrail service. This means that, far from the suggestions in the biased wording, it is in fact the A12 corridor which has more scope for improvement. There are also areas of brownfield around that area, near to Crossrail Shenfield station and Shenfield secondary school, unlike any development along the A127 corridor which lacks both of those amenities.

Yes

No, the A12 corridor is a misnomer. The vast area of wooded farmland between Hutton and Ingrave is not mentioned above. This is a rural countryside area agreement longer for the built-up areas of Hutton and Ingrave.

This area does not fit with the true A12 corridor and is an area of completely different and unique character.

Support issues raised

I would be happier for developments like that on the outskirts of Witham A12 side or Beaulieu Park Chelmsford were built here, rather than inappropriate, squeezed in developments.

see attached.

see attached

see attached

see attached.

see attached

See attached.

See attached

see attached

See attached

see attached

See attached