The site that I wish to put forward is an area of some 9.7 Ha of land in Chelmsford Road, Shenfield. The land is bounded by houses in Chelmsford Road, the Mountnessing roundabout and slip road off the westbound A12 at Junction 12, the main Norwich to London railway line and, to the south west, the site which is identified in Policy 7.4 and Figure 7.2 of the Draft Local Plan, January 2016, as Officer's meadow (site reference 034, 087 and 235).

There has already been considerable development (house-builder) interest in the site and it is both viable and available as a short-term residential development opportunity or as a safeguarded site for release in the latter part of the Local Plan period (from 2029 onwards) when all the identified sites are expected to have been developed and the Council are reliant upon windfall sites becoming available.

My husband and I went along to Brentwood Council offices last night, and were interested in all your proposed building sites. It seemed to both of us that even if only one or two were developed, an enormous strain would be put on services such as transport, already very congested, and hospitals and surgeries, schools, and homes for the care of the elderly. I do not know if these facilities will be increased to cope with the extra housing. We were told for instance that the N.H.S. would be responsible for hospital provision, and I cannot see any hope of another hospital being built. All in all we both felt that a complete new town would be the best answer. Is there any green belt land that could be released for this?
I was impressed by all the work that had gone into this presentation, I wish I knew enough to make a better comment.

I object to the above development for the reasons below:-

1) This land is green belt and should not be built upon.

2) I feel from the consultation meeting that this is Brentwood council getting Basildon to build houses on their land that should be built in Brentwood.

3) If Brentwood has to build houses build them on the A128 side of this plot. The A128 and the subsequent A127 roundabout are far bigger and less used.

4) The A127 itself is too small for the traffic now, let alone with 6000 + homes added to the usage.

5)Dunton A127 roundabout serves a main road into Laindon, A massive boot sale (Sundays and Wednesdays + bank holidays), Lower Dunton road , Ford test centre offices (1000's of employees all who drive), and soon houses built at the fortune of war are going to be finished and starting to use this small roundabout too.
It is a crazy idea to think that it can be used as an entrance for another 6000 homes, I am sure the highways agency will not readily approve it.

6) Small villages like Dunton are few and far between and the eradication of such places is further destruction of our English way of life.

7) we don't need this many houses anyway brentwood is going way over the amount of housing required by the government.

8) What about the strain on existing services in Basildon like schools and doctors, police, firemen etc I think we were told this amount of housing will warrant 5 primary schools and a secondary school where are they going to be located?

9) Why do we need this anyway all the flats in Basildon at Icon and Morello corner didn't exactly fly off the shelves did they??(I'm led to believe that some have yet to be sold) and the next stage has not been built probably due to lack of interest. ??

10) Basildon council and the highways authority have objected to plans for 50 houses further down lower Dunton road at Malgraves farm as it is not a road suited to any more traffic, so how can the other end of the same road be a viable option?

1. Any further development, no matter where, must have the infrastructure to support well this development.

2. Green Belt in and around villages must be protected at all costs. Too many villages have been swallowed up by indiscriminate development.

3. This applied to local development of existing buildings where a change of use is recognised and/or planning permission. This has happened in Blackmore.

4. On top of this, buildings have been bought and been allowed to rot, this has and is happening in Blackmore too.

We object to the exclusion of any sites in Mountnessing (save for those which already have planning consent/resolution to grant) from the housing land allocations.
Mountnessing lies within the A12 corridor, which the spatial strategy claims to be the focus for development. It is also a sustainable settlement, being served by a local shopping parade and primary school.
To exclude allocations based on the settlement hierarchy is inconsistent compared to treatment of other settlements in this category and in the A12 corridor. The recently granted consents to not serve the needs of Mountnessing. These sites, one with planning permission and another with a resolution to grant subject to a Section 106 agreement, are remote from the settlement, cannot both be relied upon as one is yet to secure planning consent and combined provide less than half of the affordable housing requirement. This is despite the Borough having a high level of affordable housing need, amongst the most expensive housing in Essex, local wages which do not support such prices and the Plan consequently seeking to maximise affordable housing provision as set out at paragraph 5.45.
As such, sites should be released from the Green Belt adjacent to Mountnessing to serve the needs of Mountnessing and contribute towards the Borough's needs.
One such suitable site is Land Adjacent to Mountnessing Primary School, (site 073 under the Strategic Growth Options Consultation and SHLAA site G093) which could provide short term delivery of much needed private and affordable homes of up to 18 units. Previously promoted by Crest Nicholson under an option agreement, it is now being promoted directly by the Landowner with Sworders acting as Planning Consultants on the Landowner's behalf.
The site is well screened, with defensible boundaries and development on four sides, ensuring minimal visual impact, it would not result in any coalescence with Ingatestone and represents a logical extension to the existing settlement boundary. It does not serve any of the purposes of the Green Belt and no constraints have been identified that would prevent its development for residential use.
The Local Plan evidence base identifies this site as the only suitable residential site at Mountnessing.
As such, Land adjacent to Mountnessing Primary School should be allocated for residential use to serve the needs of Mountnessing and contribute towards the Borough's needs.
Our full case in this regard is set out in response to Policy 5.1 Spatial Strategy.

Object to development in Ingatestone.

I am writing to you regarding my concerns over the draft plans for Ingatestone and the surrounding area.

My husband and I moved to Ingatestone 47 years ago when it was a village which was one of the reasons we chose to live here. We have watched it change over the years, with several of the old houses knocked down and new houses squeezed on to the plots.

We understand that several more areas are being ear-marked for development.
WE DO NOT have the infrastructure to cope with more houses. We already have problems with flooding at one end of the village with the sewage system unable to cope, whilst the doctors surgery is already struggling to cope with all the new residents and it is also impossible to park, plus we don't have the places in the local schools.

Our Green Belt is disappearing at an alarming rate and out wonderful village of Ingatestone is bring swallowed up and merged with Brentwood, Shenfield and Mountnessing and no doubt shortly to Margaretting and eventually joining up with Chelmsford, which is something I and my husband do not want to see.

My husband and I strongly object to the draft plans for Ingatestone. We do not need and certainly cannot accommodate any more housing.

New Developments in Ingatestone

Site 079C - Good idea if restricted to light, non-polluting (air and noise) industry.

Site 079A - Only if officers and councillors will live on A12 side of site for a minimum of 5 years and then reconsider! No one should be encouraged in any way to live on what is virtually the A12 embankment where conditions will only get worse.

Site 042 - Good idea if mixed development.

Site 128 Far too many dwellings.

In considering additional dwellings account must be taken of existing resources and how this would be managed/enlarged to cope with increase in population e.g. all three schools, medical services and parking amongst others. These services provide for an area that extends well beyond the village itself.

Please keep me advised of planning decisions/consultations.

Oakwood Nursery on the Straight Mile, Ongar Road has just been given planning permission for the development of four houses. The building they are to replace was originally a glass house built by me, later boarded over to become an office and store.

I own and let out the area in front of this development as a store for tools and materials for a landscape business (Straight Mile Nursery Gardents). It also operates as a small garden centre/nursery selling their own stores and plants. There is also a small log store and supply business run from the site.
The whole site has become considerably run down and, in part, derelict through the tenant's lack of investment.

I am asking that the site be considered as a brownfield site suitable for the building of a small number of houses. I am only interested in low-profile eco houses (green roof, solar, etc.) to be shielded from the road by gardens and existing and extensive new tree planting.

I would be pleased to have your thoughts on the matter.

See two attached comment sheets.

See two attached comment sheets.

Please find attached - call for sites- in respect of Collins Farm Goodwood Avenue Hutton.

The owners of the sites are Messis J and N Chaplin.
Details and Plan are attached.

** Collins Farm Goodwood Avenue Hutton.

Collins Farm lies at the end of Goodwood Avenue as shown on the plan. The site in question extends to approximately 14 acres of which, again as shown on the plan, approximately 4 acres would be for Housing development and 10 acres would be given to the Council to extend the Country Park that adjoins the site. The proposed development would be a natural extension to Goodwood Avenue and at the same time allow for the extension of the existing Country Park.

Collin Farm lies in a sustainable location being within easy access of local shops, amenities and schools, The site is well supported by public transport, with a regular bus service being within easy walking distance. It is clear that children that live in the near vicinity use public transport to access the various local schools. The site is therefore in a clearly sustainable location, it is currently poor grade grassland.

Originally the whole of Collin Farm was submitted for development and it was due to the size, at the time over 24 acres, that it was rejected in the SHLAA. The SHLAA recognized that the site was sustainable and capable of development. The new proposal reduces the area to be developed from 24 acres to approximately 4 and at the same time offers the Council an opportunity to expand the Country Park that was created some 10 years ago.

The site would be able to take advantage of the Crossrail scheme currently under construction; this will create a major hub at Shenfield station. The station is easily accessible from Collins Farm, being a 10 mins bus journey. The importance of Crossrail should not be underestimated to the surrounding areas of Shenfield, it will enable fast and easy journeys to the West End as well as the City. It will create an increase in demand for those working in London to live in easy reach of Shenfield station.

Within the draft Plan it mentions about the sites having defensible boundaries, the proposal would clearly meet this criteria and would ensure the development would remain a natural extension to Goodwood Avenue.

See attached

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

1. Priests Lane is an extremely busy road especially in the morning rush hour when traffic can be backed up 750 yards from the junction with Middleton Hall Lane, and also in the evening rush hour. The situation is made even worse if there are traffic problems on the A12. The erection of houses on these sites will add significantly to traffic congestion and an even greater number of cars will use Priests Lane if a sports facility is added on the site.
2. Access to the site from any of three possible junctions will I believe be potentially dangerous to car users and pedestrians and I believe an independent assessment of access should be made by an expert.
3. Priests Lane is already very narrow in parts and has only one pavement for some considerable part of it. Additional traffic and the access point to the site mentioned under 2 above will make for more dangerous conditions for pedestrians, especially school children who use the road to reach the three schools near the town end of Priests Lane.
4. Residents already have to tolerate traffic noise, and this will be made worse by construction vehicles, which in the narrow parts of Priests Lane will need to mount the curb to pass other traffic.
5. Residents are entitled to quiet enjoyment of their properties, and of construction were to go ahead, this would be lost to them and the general environment would be affected.
6. There are two schools adjacent to the site and the children there will be affected by the construction noise. Especially worrying is the effect on the children at The Endeavour School who all have special needs to a lesser or greater extent and from personal experience the effect on them could be excessive.
7. Using these sites will lead to a loss of open space in an already built up area.
8. Houses in Priests Lane have in the last few years suffered from attacks on gardens by badgers and it is possible that these sites could be the home of badger sets and badgers are a protected species. I understand these sites are home to many other wild animals and trees all of which could suffer from the developments.
9. I do not believe that the number of dwellings proposed in the draft plan will be adhered to as developers have the habit of increasing the density at detailed planning application time, and this will result in further increase in congestion.
10. I would doubt that the additional population added by this proposed development could be catered for by local health facilities as anyone who uses these facilities locally will confirm.
11. During rush hours, the junction of Priests Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is very congested and is I believe in an area that already breaches EU regulations on air quality and an increase in dwellings can only add to this problem.
12. I am concerned that the utility supplies in Priests Lane which over recent years has been found to be below acceptable standards will be able to cope with additional dwellings.
One other point I would like to make about the Local Development Plan is that number of dwellings identified for Brentwood Town centre will overwhelm an already congested and polluted area and residents will have to accept a deterioration of the quality of the town centre. There are plenty of Brownfield sites available for development in the Parishes and on the outskirts of the town centre.

The land concerned is in the A12 corridor behind our house.
* Has the A12 widening project been considered in choosing this land? From the draft consultation of widening, it was proposed to compulsorily purchase houses at the end of Warescot Road and Warescot Close or tunnel underneath these houses. If houses are built on the new piece of land these may be taken out under the A12 plan at a later date.
* The land concerned is greenfield green belt land and this further erodes the green belt. There are badgers, deer, foxes and many birds on the land- there is a big badger set behind our house.
* Under our house there runs a 16ft sewer pipe which goes out into the land. When we built our extension, we were allowed special permission to build as the house pre-dated the sewer. Building would not be allowed over the sewer by the water board.
* All the schools locally are full to capacity and new school places/ school buildings would be needed to educate the children from the new houses. Could you build a new school on the North side in Pilgrims Hatch
* Doctor's surgeries are full to capacity. Why not build a new Doctor's surgery on the North side of the land to accommodate Pilgrims Hatch people?
* Traffic congestion in the area is bad especially at rush -hour times- A new link to the A12 could be useful to avoid everyone having to funnel through Brentwood. Brook Street roundabout would need to be improved.
* The area needs "affordable" houses for people aiming to downsize and young couples buying their first house. Affordable needs to be lower priced but with space for a growing or returning family
* Have you thought about building a new village with new infrastructure and linked to the M25 to the North of Brentwood. As downsizers and parents of young adults we would welcome this if the houses were right and probably lots of other people would feel the same.
* For the plot of land 023, there could be fewer houses, not near to A12- 250 is too many

1. Priests Lane is an extremely busy road especially in the morning rush hour when traffic can be backed up 750 yards from the junction with Middleton Hall Lane, and also in the evening rush hour. The situation is made even worse if there are traffic problems on the A12. The erection of houses on these sites will add significantly to traffic congestion and an even greater number of cars will use Priests Lane if a sports facility is added on the site.
2. Access to the site from any of three possible junctions will I believe be potentially dangerous to car users and pedestrians and I believe an independent assessment of access should be made by an expert.
3. Priests Lane is already very narrow in parts and has only one pavement for some considerable part of it. Additional traffic and the access point to the site mentioned under 2 above will make for more dangerous conditions for pedestrians, especially school children who use the road to reach the three schools near the town end of Priests Lane.
4. Residents already have to tolerate traffic noise, and this will be made worse by construction vehicles, which in the narrow parts of Priests Lane will need to mount the curb to pass other traffic.
5. Residents are entitled to quiet enjoyment of their properties, and of construction were to go ahead, this would be lost to them and the general environment would be affected.
6. There are two schools adjacent to the site and the children there will be affected by the construction noise. Especially worrying is the effect on the children at The Endeavour School who all have special needs to a lesser or greater extent and from personal experience the effect on them could be excessive.
7. Using these sites will lead to a loss of open space in an already built up area.
8. Houses in Priests Lane have in the last few years suffered from attacks on gardens by badgers and it is possible that these sites could be the home of badger sets and badgers are a protected species. I understand these sites are home to many other wild animals and trees all of which could suffer from the developments.
9. I do not believe that the number of dwellings proposed in the draft plan will be adhered to as developers have the habit of increasing the density at detailed planning application time, and this will result in further increase in congestion.
10. I would doubt that the additional population added by this proposed development could be catered for by local health facilities as anyone who uses these facilities locally will confirm.
11. During rush hours, the junction of Priests Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is very congested and is I believe in an area that already breaches EU regulations on air quality and an increase in dwellings can only add to this problem.
12. I am concerned that the utility supplies in Priests Lane which over recent years has been found to be below acceptable standards will be able to cope with additional dwellings.
One other point I would like to make about the Local Development Plan is that number of dwellings identified for Brentwood Town centre will overwhelm an already congested and polluted area and residents will have to accept a deterioration of the quality of the town centre. There are plenty of Brownfield sites available for development in the Parishes and on the outskirts of the town centre.

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached.

I strongly object to LDP for the following reasons Brentwood cannot fulfill any alleged housing targets due to greenbelt constraints which are a material restriction as demonstrated in recent planning cases and, in January 2016, by Castle Point Council
80% of Brentwoods growth, to 2033, is estimated to be from people moving into Brentwood Borough Brentwoods Metropolitan greenbelt acts as a green lung to neighbouring London London is a low density city able to withstand further growth
Global warming, climate change and flood plains are a real threat to our planet and the destruction of our green belt is a major reason for this.

See attached

The proposed development at Viking Way would be problematic with regards to traffic control. Any development at Pilgrims Hatch would be very strongly opposed.
Dunton Garden Suburb, not trying to shift the housing problem to another area, if housing requirements could be met with proper infrastructure put in place at the time of development I consider this to be the best option. The impact would be less than trying to squeeze as many houses as possible into any pieces of land that appear to be unused around Brentwood thus upsetting many, many residents in the process.

To the north, Hullets Lane has wonderful wildlife and historic value with listed buildings on site, any further traffic joining the Ongar Road at that junction would be unjustified. Although brown field land it is full of historic and characteristic value, an absolute no. (I believe the pilgrims used this area as their stop over on the way to Canterbury).
Costcutters, and land to the rear, Hatch Road is a very busy road - any further traffic here would have dire consequences for residents. Rural villages should be kept rural, that is why residents choose to live there in the first place.

The proposed development at Viking Way would be problematic with regards to traffic control. Any development at Pilgrims Hatch would be very strongly opposed.
Dunton Garden Suburb, not trying to shift the housing problem to another area, if housing requirements could be met with proper infrastructure put in place at the time of development I consider this to be the best option. The impact would be less than trying to squeeze as many houses as possible into any pieces of land that appear to be unused around Brentwood thus upsetting many, many residents in the process.

To the north, Hullets Lane has wonderful wildlife and historic value with listed buildings on site, any further traffic joining the Ongar Road at that junction would be unjustified. Although brown field land it is full of historic and characteristic value, an absolute no. (I believe the pilgrims used this area as their stop over on the way to Canterbury).
Costcutters, and land to the rear, Hatch Road is a very busy road - any further traffic here would have dire consequences for residents. Rural villages should be kept rural, that is why residents choose to live there in the first place.

The proposed development at Viking Way would be problematic with regards to traffic control. Any development at Pilgrims Hatch would be very strongly opposed.
Dunton Garden Suburb, not trying to shift the housing problem to another area, if housing requirements could be met with proper infrastructure put in place at the time of development I consider this to be the best option. The impact would be less than trying to squeeze as many houses as possible into any pieces of land that appear to be unused around Brentwood thus upsetting many, many residents in the process.

To the north, Hullets Lane has wonderful wildlife and historic value with listed buildings on site, any further traffic joining the Ongar Road at that junction would be unjustified. Although brown field land it is full of historic and characteristic value, an absolute no. (I believe the pilgrims used this area as their stop over on the way to Canterbury).
Costcutters, and land to the rear, Hatch Road is a very busy road - any further traffic here would have dire consequences for residents. Rural villages should be kept rural, that is why residents choose to live there in the first place.

The proposed development at Viking Way would be problematic with regards to traffic control. Any development at Pilgrims Hatch would be very strongly opposed.
Dunton Garden Suburb, not trying to shift the housing problem to another area, if housing requirements could be met with proper infrastructure put in place at the time of development I consider this to be the best option. The impact would be less than trying to squeeze as many houses as possible into any pieces of land that appear to be unused around Brentwood thus upsetting many, many residents in the process.

To the north, Hullets Lane has wonderful wildlife and historic value with listed buildings on site, any further traffic joining the Ongar Road at that junction would be unjustified. Although brown field land it is full of historic and characteristic value, an absolute no. (I believe the pilgrims used this area as their stop over on the way to Canterbury).
Costcutters, and land to the rear, Hatch Road is a very busy road - any further traffic here would have dire consequences for residents. Rural villages should be kept rural, that is why residents choose to live there in the first place.

See attachment.

Having studied the draft local housing plan for Brentwood in some depth, I notice there is a plan to build on the land adjacent to the A12 (on its northern side) which is situated between the A12 and Viking Way. On a personal note, and I beg your indulgence as it is at odds with what I believe is best for our town, my wife and I have often said, during our thirty three years of residency here, that if this land was to be developed in the way proposed it would reduce, or even eradicate, the noise nuisance from the A12 that has increased over the years, mainly owing to regular resurfacing of the road resulting in it being higher now. As we find this so objectionable, I spent a great deal of time obtaining signatures on a petition for Vicki Davies who was able, on the strength of this, to arrange for noise testing to be done. The levels exceed those that are considered to be acceptable and it was proposed that a low noise surface be reinstated as this had reduced noise in the past. That was several years ago and nothing has been done!

It is common knowledge that for some years our housing stock has been diminishing, resulting in an increasing number of people being homeless, and I am a great believer in that something needs to be done to address this problem. I firmly believed that the best way forward was to develop brown fill areas such as the one local to me on the Highwood hospital site which, I believe, was very well done by the developers - a site to be proud of! Unfortunately, its completion has caused some problems.

After the houses on the site were fully occupied, I have it on good authority that when one of the GPs at the Brambles Surgery (the surgery situated on this site) retired, the local health authority refused to replace him. The NHS managers had expected his 1500 or so patients to be absorbed into existing local surgeries. One of these offered to run the practice as a branch surgery providing another GP could be employed my them, funded by the local health authority. The NHS managers, again, refused and this plan was only accepted when all the local surgeries closed their lists to new patients. Further to this, I learnt on the 2nd of February that there was a twenty six day wait for the first GP appointment at the surgery that I attend although, in fairness, patients are seen if the doctors feel the case is an emergency.

Since the Highwood hospital development, traffic between it and the centre of town has increased significantly. Testimony to this was one of our councillors complaining that he was finding it increasingly difficult to turn right out of Geary Drive onto the Ongar Road. This, of course, was remedied for him by the construction of the mini roundabout at this junction.

Although the draft plans discuss, very fully, the subject of infrastructure, considering the poor record of upgrading these to meet increasing needs, highlighted by the shortcomings above, I am not convinced that the residents of Brentwood would not suffer adversely if the proposals for the developments planned in the town and its environs are adopted.

Because of this, for some time now, I have come to recognise that the best solution for overcoming the housing shortage would be to build new towns well away from existing built up areas. There would almost certainly be some objections to this type of development by people living close to them but, owing to the relative remoteness of appropriate sites, the numbers objecting to and effected by them pale into insignificance compared to those living in already developed urban and suburban areas.

Other advantages of new towns/garden villages include, among other things, self sufficiency which means that all necessary facilities such as GP surgeries are included and, as such, are far more likely to meet the needs of residents compared to the erosion of services, as explained above, when attempting to boost existing facilities to meet additional needs. Although I am not in a position of knowledge to comment with any authority on schools, I suspect the same could be true of the provision of education for our young people.

Another obvious benefit of this type of development is, despite accommodating large numbers, the impact of traffic in local towns would be far less compared to that created by the provision of in town housing schemes - this also addresses one of my main concerns; one which I am sure is shared by many of Brentwood's residents.

With the above points in mind, I applaud the plan for Dunton Hills Garden Village and congratulate the planners for its conception. My greatest hope is that another area, or areas, could be developed in this way as an alternative to the additional housing being considered for development in Brentwood town and areas in close proximity to it.

See attached