brentwood.gov.uk

We write with reference to the above document. We live at (xx address) and we object strongly to the proposed developments in our area. We already suffer from parking problems in Roman Road as a result of your Council's agreement to the over development of the old Heybridge Hotel site. You are now proposing to give permission to erect dense housing developments on three sites no's. 128, 106 and 079A on your draft plan, all of which have access on to the current very busy Roman Road. Your proposed density of these sites will obviously increase the parking problems on Roman Road making sight lines for drivers using or accessing this road increasingly more difficult. Ingatestone village itself already has parking problems as do our local doctors and schools. Also, our railway station car park is already virtually full every day. What facilities are the possible 500 to 700 new residents going to use? I can see no additional doctors surgeries, car parking, schools, bus services, amenity areas or local shops in this draft document. Also, the proposed industrial area, 079C, would be totally out of context with our village. We currently have a mix of small offices and businesses, which operate well within the the village community. Currently, our local industrial area is just outside Shenfield, which it would seem more logical to extend. I think that the residents of Ingatestone would like to keep Ingatestone the village that it is. I have lived in Ingatestone since 1945 and have seen the village change dramatically, not necessarily for the better, and feel that any further development on the scale suggested would be very much to its detriment. I hope you will consider our comments, forcing the developers to dramatically reduce the density of housing and not change the use of our current Green Belt boundaries. We believe that none of these sites are brownfield sites and we are sure that 079A and 079C are Green Belt land.