Object
Preferred Site Allocations 2018
Representation ID: 18457
Received: 28/02/2018
Respondent: Mr. Andrew Rowland
Although the site density has been reduced, it is still far too much and is not within keeping of the character of the area. Undue strain on services - school, doctors, transport - as well as utilities - sewers, drainage, water supply, and treatment. The infrastructure (namely roads and parking facilities) are not able to cope at present. Additional development will only make this worse. Object to the loss of open green space.
(Land at Priest Lane, Shenfield; Site reference 044 & 178). The reduced density of the proposed site for 95 dwellings from 130 dwellings is still far in excess of that of the surrounding area and therefore not following a sympathetic approach to the immediate surroundings. Looking at the plan, in my opinion the site development would appear to be 3 or 4 times the density of the local area. This would surely, through necessity need to include flats and the like and again, not sympathetic to the local area - This is not acceptable. To place 95 dwellings so densely on a relatively small plot will place undue pressure on the local amenities; schools, doctors, transport and also to utilities; sewers, drainage, water supplies and treatment. There would also be a significant increase in vehicular and domestic pollution; if recreational facilities are to be included then noise pollution would also increase - This is not acceptable. Given that locally, the average household has in excess of 2 cars, there will potentially be an additional 190 cars joining Priests Lane for the commuter and school runs that are already at breaking point, especially at the junction with Middleton Hall Lane. The local road and parking infrastructure is also at breaking point with residents continuously circling Shenfield in pursuit of ever-decreasingly available parking places. Priests lane is exactly that: a lane. It was never intended as a main road or primary route, as borne out by the fact that the road is constantly in need of repair. Furthermore the increased traffic from the additional 190 vehicles and users of the recreational facilities will render the route even more dangerous, especially for cyclists and pedestrians. This proposed development would exacerbate the serious traffic problems that already exist. This is not acceptable. No indication is given of parking facilities available at the new development. As with all new developments this is rarely adequate and therefore it is likely that parking will spill out to the existing areas - This is not acceptable. I object most strongly to the potential loss of local open space. The Shenfield and Brentwood area has been the subject of extensive development over recent years and is in danger of losing its character and charm; the reason I moved here in the first place - This is not acceptable.