brentwood.gov.uk

Site Reference 079A - this area is green belt land and I object to this being changed.
Site Reference 079C - this area is also green belt land and therefore as above I object to this being changed.
Site Reference 128 - I object to this site being used for housing when there was a going concern which was used by the community as a garden centre.
The café was always busy, being used by: local nursing homes taking residents for lunches, afternoon teas, etc.; by clubs, such as the knitting club weekly, to name but a few.
The centre itself was busy - Xmas being a prime example - one weekend there were loads of Xmas trees the following weekend when I went to buy mine they were all gone!
As far as I am aware no one had any idea it was about to close, the local population was still turning up to use it after it was shut and not even the employees themselves appeared to know.
If, as we have been told, it was because the owner had run out of money, then I am wondering why he did not try to sell it as a going concern (ie a garden centre). He has not even tried to sell off his stock in a closing down sale. It feels to me (perhaps cynically!) that it was to force the hand of Brentwood Council in granting the planning application. I shall be sad if this is allowed to happen.
A question re Site reference 128 and 079C
I am even more confused - why does one business closes down (ie the garden centre - Site Reference 128 - which gave employment) and another area (Site Reference 079C) have a proposed change of use in order to give employment? What is stopping the 'Proposed Employment Site - 079C of being put onto Site Reference 128 which is already an employment site rather than changing the use of the green belt land?