brentwood.gov.uk

I support the overall policy as proposed and particularly the identification by BBC of the unique character of Brentwood as consisting of a set of villages which is why I like it and live here. That village structure though is very fragile and has been vigorously defended by successive local and parish councils and residents against a constant barrage of development attempts.

As with all development that I have witnessed in areas closer to and radiating from London there is an initial fairly easy 'win' in the redevelopment of redundant industrial and / or large house sites. This is repeated over the years until all of the obvious sites are exhausted which is effectively the position that Brentwood finds itself in. e.g. the laundry in Western Avenue, Selex plant in Woodman Road and high levels of infill and repurposing such as t he Doctors' surgery site and old Freewheeler pub site in Doddinghurst.

I believe that this leaves us in a position where the character is under threat by infill destroying the edges of the villages. There are constant attempts to expand the area of my village, Doddinghurst and it is this threat that I will return to later.

I have lived in Brentwood (Doddinghurst) for 35 years and have witnessed back garden development off my road (twice!) and other infill developments and a change in the character of Brentwood to more flats and a more transient population which has changed the town from a family town.

The character of the village nature would be lost and the social cohesion also lost if further development was permitted in Doddinghurst. The infrastructure is incapable of supporting development in terms of all utilities and services.

As importantly, the younger generation appears not to want to live as I did in the countryside with its lack of public transport and lack of access to social and entertainment facilities and easy transport at the end of a day (or night) in London. It is in short, cut-off. This makes further development unnecessary and only serves to destroy the village without appreciably answering the 'dictated' need for more housing regardless of whether long term that will be needed as properties are released by an aging population that will downsize and free up housing as the 'baby boom' generation reaches their upper 70's and beyond. Any development should take this demographic change into account in allowing people to remain amongst friends and an area they know in later life. This element seems largely missing from the LDP.

Dunton

I am of the opinion that a relatively large and self contained 'village' development is the only practical answer as proposed in the LDP to providing the number of houses demanded of Brentwood. The concept as proposed is to effectively add another 'village' south of the A127 in an attempt to re-create the organically developed villages to the north of Brentwood such as Doddinghurst.
As stated earlier, the services are largely at breaking point in my village and piecemeal infill development would require a disproportionate investment in infrastructure and services compared to the housing 'unit' gain achieved. It would also result in a disproportionate damage to the quality of life and nature of the village.

If properly developed, then a real community can be established at the Dunton site with new schools, doctors, roads, sewage and all other basic services and the A127 also upgraded from its poor current standard. There is also a greater supply of suitable available land to the south of the A127.

Reference Site Allocation Maps (January 2016)
I refer to this document and particularly to the list of non-allocated housing and employment sites.
I support the containment nature of the sites proposed elsewhere by the LDP but I am very concerned at the list of non-allocated sites including several in my village.

This list is I am aware not those that are being proposed but I am very concerned that if Dunton fails to materialise and provide the bulk of the required housing then this list might be used to provide the shortfall. Whereas the LDP proposes limited development in the northern villages, this list has what are largely opportunistic and highly invasive sites proposed.

Many of the constant development proposals that have been fought through the planning process and rightfully refused both locally and at enquiry now appear in this list. It is as if we are bombarded by sufficient planning applications to eventually wear us down and to witness a total change in our village clearly against the wishes of residents.
Individuals have purchased properties and land and have put forward development sites that would radically and irreversibly change (ruin) Doddinghurst.
In particular, there is a constant push to extend and build in the rural part of Brook Lane between Mountnessing Lane and the 'made up' part of Brook Lane nearer to the village. There are large plots backing onto a beautiful country lane with a river by its side. Recently, fences have been put up and have partly encroached on the lane and attempts made to extend with several applications for building. It would be a prize for a developer but there are no facilities or infrastructure; would create a massive back development almost parallel to Doddinghurst Road and cause danger on local roads - this in addition to the massive loss of amenity that villagers would experience by the loss of this remaining rural lane.

I trust that we will not have to face the mammoth task of fighting all over again proposals to develop this and other sites that have properly been refused in the past and that current opportunistic applications will be firmly refused.