Please find enclosed an O.S extract of the whole of HILLCREST NURSERIES site in Ingrave. The nursery is owned by the undersigned.

As the only developable area within the settlement of Herongate and Ingrave you may wish to consider the development potential of the land.

- Increase in an already congested area of traffic
- Strain on local services that are already oversubscribed

Plese don't use greenfield sites for development until every scrap of brownfield has been used.

I wish to object to the development of the sites 044 and 178 as described in the Local Development Plan.

My reasons for my objection are as follows:

1. Traffic Concerns and Road Safety

We live at No.62 Priests Lane - I have on previous occasions over the years written to the local councillors about my concerns for the current safety of the road - due to high speed of cars on the road at off peak times combined with the lack of pavement on one side of the road and high level of vehicles using the road.
Currently it is both difficult and dangerous exiting our property either on foot or in a car.
Children need to cross the Lane to reach the pavement to walk to and from school .

There are bends along the Lane which impair visibility and there have been numerous accidents over the years. The most recent of which was on Sunday morning 13 March at 6.45am when a car hit the road side by No 64 and spun across the road causing serious damage to the car.

Congestion can be severe now at peak times of the day - traffic often queueing down to Glanthams Road from Middleton Hall Lane junction. This can only worsen with increased traffic on the Lane.

The Lane is narrow in areas such that is difficult for 2 vehicles to pass easily along that stretch. There is no possibility of a safe cycle lane on the Lane . There is no provision for public transport on the Lane .
Developing the sites above will only increase the traffic on Priests Lane.

2. Pollution

Pollution levels are already known to be at a high level at the junction of Ingrave Road , Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane. This can only worsen with development of the site.
This junction is where in particular school children walk through daily to reach 3 local secondary schools - Brentwood School , Brentwood County High School , Brentwood Ursuline Convent High School .
Increasing traffic and hence pollution will place these school children at even greater risk from the effects of pollution and also other pedestrians.



3. Protected Open Urban Site

The site has been designated as a Protected Urban Site - green sites within urban developments are known to be important both to the local community and local wildlife . Badgers , deer , foxes and a wide variety of bird life have been seen on the site.
Loss of this site would appear to go against both local policy and also national policies aimed at protecting green spaces.

We wish to submit a site for consideration within the housing land allocation.

The site in question is the Land on the south east side of Bird Lane, Great Warley.

The site has infrastructure to support a housing development and demand for housing in the area is high. A residential development with a mix of affordable housing is proposed. The site benefits from a close proximity to Woodlands School and has good transport and bus links.

A sustainable development is proposed which builds on the green belt nature of the land. The proposed density would be in accordance with PPG3 at approximately 40 dwellings per ha. This site would therefore accommodate approximately 140 houses. In accordance with proposed policy 7.2, 10% of the plots would be allocated for self builders and 5% of the housing would be designed to be accessible by elderly or disabled persons.

See attached.

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.

See attached.

1. The closure of Ingatestone Garden Centre is a sad loss. The Council should refuse change of use and encourage a new garden centre operator to take over the site.

2. Regarding the other Ingatestone development, we support the choice of brownfield sites.

3. We will not support any development on Green Belt land, the government needs to learn to manage national population so that this is not necessary. We have written to Eric Pickles regarding this issue.

Thank you for bringing your display to Ingatestone. We much appreciate the helpful and friendly approach of the Planning Policy Team staff.

We would like to upload document in support of proposal for Site # 162 of Brentwood Local Development Plan.
This is re development of 150 Bed Nursing Home and services at Little Warley Hall Farm.
This proposal has support of Brentwood Councillors.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached

See attached

See attached

The number of homes proposed for the area in and around West Horndon is totally disproportionate compared to the total number of homes being proposed by Brentwood Borough Council, and is also much too high for a village currently made up of 650 homes. We are also very close to the borders of Basildon, Thurrock and Havering, and there is a real risk that homes proposed by these councils could also impact our infrastructure, especially as Thurrock has not yet published their LDP.

West Horndon was originally put forward as we have a train station and are close to the A127. During the last two years however, traffic has increased greatly on the A127 (it frequently stops completely in the rush hour) and the trains are now so crowded at West Horndon, that it is difficult to get on a train, let alone get a seat.

Despite this however, I am in favour of 350/400 homes on the area that is now the West Horndon Industrial Estates, as I believe that this Industrial Estate, with the very large lorries that visit it, is no longer appropriate for a residential village.

I am against development of Green Belt land and I believe that the Green Belt around West Horndon is particularly important because of our proximity to Havering and through them, London. I believe that as suggested in the latest LDP the outline of West Horndon should be preserved.

There are flooding issues around this village, which I believe would be exacerbate by a large housing estate, but I would reluctantly agree to a new small village of approximately 600 homes being built on the Timmermans Nursery site by the A127, provided that a buffer zone, preferably a wooded area, was constructed between the new village and West Horndon.

The doctor's surgery is also at capacity now, this issue must also be addressed as a matter of urgency.

The number of homes proposed for the area in and around West Horndon is totally disproportionate compared to the total number of homes being proposed by Brentwood Borough Council, and is also much too high for a village currently made up of 650 homes. We are also very close to the borders of Basildon, Thurrock and Havering, and there is a real risk that homes proposed by these councils could also impact our infrastructure, especially as Thurrock has not yet published their LDP.

West Horndon was originally put forward as we have a train station and are close to the A127. During the last two years however, traffic has increased greatly on the A127 (it frequently stops completely in the rush hour) and the trains are now so crowded at West Horndon, that it is difficult to get on a train, let alone get a seat.

Despite this however, I am in favour of 350/400 homes on the area that is now the West Horndon Industrial Estates, as I believe that this Industrial Estate, with the very large lorries that visit it, is no longer appropriate for a residential village.

I am against development of Green Belt land and I believe that the Green Belt around West Horndon is particularly important because of our proximity to Havering and through them, London. I believe that as suggested in the latest LDP the outline of West Horndon should be preserved.

There are flooding issues around this village, which I believe would be exacerbate by a large housing estate, but I would reluctantly agree to a new small village of approximately 600 homes being built on the Timmermans Nursery site by the A127, provided that a buffer zone, preferably a wooded area, was constructed between the new village and West Horndon.

The doctor's surgery is also at capacity now, this issue must also be addressed as a matter of urgency.

Dear Sir/Madame
I am a resident of Hulletts Lane and I have a strong concern regarding the Lane itself, the pot holes have become so bad that in the past three weeks I have had to buy two new tyres for my car and my partner struggles to push our baby up the lane in his buggy as it has become so bad. There is a large field in front of us which was covered with trees and bushes but around 80% of the trees and bushes have been taken down in this green belt which also joins the Ongar road. This filed is like a swomp and I beleive that the rain water is not being soaked up by the trees as much as it use too and is causing the lane to become extremely dangerous as the rain water sits in the pot holes which then makes them worse and the lane becomes like a stream.
I have attached a few photos I took when it was raining and I was driving down the lane, this shows how the lane becomes like a stream and the feild opposite is like a swomp. Also the noise from the Ongar road has become much louder now the trees have been taken down. Even though we have had a few weeks of lovely weather it is still like a swonp and the lane is in a terrible condition.
I am just concerned that if this is what it is like now, if there is any more traffic coming in down the lane from any potenetial future developments or more trees taken down it will become impossible to live here.
Kind Regards
Christopher Andrews

COMMENT ON THE STRATEGIC GROWTH OPTIONS CONSULTATION 2015

From: Christopher Andrews
Sent: 09 February 2015 11:38
To: Planning Policy
Subject: Strategic Growth Option. Hulletts Lane Pilgrims Hatch


Christopher Andrews
Leanne Game

Please see below my comments and objections to the recent proposals by Brentwood council for the stragatic growth option, in Pilgrims Hatch sites 011A, 011B, 011C and 0176.

I am a resident in Hulletts lane, I moved here for the tranquility and beautiful landscapes that surround us with historical grade II listed buildings, this has always been an area for peoples enjoyment, from the well known groups that go on walks down Hulletts lane through the fields which is an accient walk (shown on your website for popular walks), to dog walkers being able to enjoy the wonderful landscapes, bike riders who have somewhere to ride safely off road and the horse riders of the local farms who can enjoy the amazing green belt land.

On your website you explain all about "the history of the walks which Pilgrims took for centeries as they made there way from Canterbury from the North which is described as the Clockwise Walk", with all the "ancient trees which have been pollardeds or coppiced over hundreds of years", passing Hulletts Farm and Gents Farm which are the grade II listed buildings, Vine cottages where the Andrews sisters lived who served the local manor house. Do these local trees have a TPO to them as they should do being so old and historical.

There are Bats, great crested newts and badgers everywhere in this land due to the old buildings and green belt land which are seen to be protected species and part of the contry environment. Has a dawn to dust survey been carried out? Has a archaelological surevey been carried out? Has an ecological survey been carried out? Is there any contamination in the ground from old foundations etc or a soil survey been done? I beleieve there could be Japanese knotweed and random Gases, which is an issue.

Your website also states "keep an eye out for birds darting in and out, in the summer you should see plenty of insects including butterflies that will feed on the flowering plants that grow at the field edge". I have seen some of the most beautiful birds in the fields which I have never seen anywhere before and this is all down to the open area green belt land. A development on this green belt land would not satisfy the environments requirements with the wildlife or historical values and ruin this beautiful open area that I am so passionate about. This is an area which has special character to it with all the listed buildings and I feel it should be preserved for the futures history.

A building development would be the greatest threat for this green belt area and being so close to two grade II listed buildings which are limited to find in such amazing areas, there are much more suitable areas near by to develop which will not effect the historical land, properties and are not in a green belt area. I am also so concerned that we will be highly looked over.

The definition of green belt is a policy for controlling urban growth, the policy is to protect the land around larger urban centres from urban sprawl, it helps protect agricultural activities and the unique character of rural communities, it is defined as an open space. This defination shows that it is green belt for a reason, to keep as much open space as we can and to protect it from any future development.

The defination of Grade II listed buildings is a building that has been placed on a statutory list of buildings with special architectual or historical interest. There are two grade II listed buildings which are in between the proposed development Gents Farm and Hulletts Farm, for some reason Hulletts Farm is not shown on all the maps.

Access is a huge issue, Hulletts lane is a bridal path/ foot path which is extremly small and would not be able to cope with any more traffic in and out due to the small access, it is extremely dangerous as a fire engine or ambulance would not be able to drive in and be able to turn around which is needed for any new build houses. This lane (Hulletts Lane) is the lane/bridal path where the walkers, bike riders, horse riders etc come down and it would be too dangerous if there was to be any more traffic due to it being so small.

For us as residents of Hulletts Lane, including 1 and 2 Vine Cottages, The Cottage, Gents Farm, Cedars, Fiesta and more do not want this development, we also find that it is already really dangerous to pull out onto the Ongar road as the traffic at the point where we pull out slows down from the national speed limit to 30mph and no one keeps to this speed making it so harder and dangerous to pull out, its difficult to get clear visibility from left to right when we pull out onto the Ongar road which makes access a nightmare as it is already. Also with the two round abouts at the top of Hulletts lane and Orchid lane causes congestion and I see traffic development becoming a major issue if there was added development leading to added cars, every property has on average two cars each which would cause over congestion.

Unfortunatly the home owner of The Cedars in Hulletts Lane is in Hopsital after suffering a stroke and I am unsure if she has any family to object this development but as a keen bird lover I know she would not want this deveopment to happen, she worked in the South Weald museum which has artifacts of wildlife in the area and having known her for a few years I know she loved being in her garden and would feel very strongly about objecting this future development.

Floods are an issue in this land as it is low level, in extreme rain Hulletts Lane becomes a stream with all the rain water running down to a drain outside of "The Cottage" which is not large enough to carry the water away properly, the one advantage we have is we are surrounded by trees which soak up a great deal of this rain water and if they were to be taken down would cause extreme major flood risk. The land has a lot of clay in it which doesnt help with the flood issues, clay has a high plasticity and is highly shrinkable which can cause a problem, particularly if combined with trees. Trees take a vast amount of moisture from the subsoil and clay has a propensity to increase in volume when it is wet, if a tree is removed or damaged then it will increase to take moisture from the subsoil and the dry dry clay will take on that moisture and expand, this causes a problme known as heave where the ground will rise to the detriment of any foundations. I also beleieve there is a natural spring in plot 0176 which is also adds to the high water level in this low land as with out the trees near by would certainly cause issues.

This land has already been objected to planning years ago when there was a planning application put in for the green belt fields surrounding Hulletts lane.

Thank you for this opportunity to express our feelings on this proposed option and I hope you can appreciate our concern for this area and I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

Could I ask that you could be kind enough to email me back to acknowledge my email has sent to the correct address.

KInd Regards

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached.

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

I would like to put forward as a late response to the local plan consultation the following Land adjoining 7 Hanging Hill Lane Hutton for possible residential development of either self build or smaller properties for either rental or affordable or a mixture of both I left a plan of the property with Camilla James.

See attached