Ingatestone and Mountnessing cannot sustain the addition of a further 60 homes on the site of the garden centre (Site ref 128).
Train transport infrastructure (both parking at Ingatestone Station and seat availability on trains) cannot support the the additional demand such an increase in housing will deliver.
Further the Medical and Educational infrastructure of these parishes would struggle to breaking point with such an increase in demand. Clearly other services such as policing, fire services and refuse collection will also suffer an additional burden.
The High Street is already congested and has limited free and paid parking. The addition of 60 new household's worth of vehicles will increase congestion and heighten danger to pedestrians in the centre of Ingatestone.
Site traffic will add to existing congestion both through the village and in and around the Heybridge area of Ingatestone.
As a brownfield site Ref 128 should be considered at worst for like for like rebuild (light industrial) and should not add to the infrastructural burden placed on Ingatestone and Mountnessing.

See attached

Building on the Garden centre site and the greenfield sites between Roman Road and the A12(128 and 079a fig 7.2) is bound to cause significant and ongoing disruption to all existing residents of Ingatestone and Mountnessing.

The introduction of this volume of households will surely place an unbearable strain on the existing transport infrastructure - parking at Ingatestone station is already problematic and seats on the train practically non-existent. Further the educational, medical and social infrastructure of Ingatestone and Mountnessing will also be sorely tested by the introduction of this volume of households.

The volume of traffic running through Ingatestone High St already leads to congestion and danger to pedestrians - this will only increase with the introduction of more households and 'employment' property. There's very limited parking in the centre of the village already and competition for those places will only increase - with out any increase in provision (not practically possible) there will simply be an increase in cars parking outside legally specified parking areas.

Clearly any significant construction project is also going to add to traffic levels with lorries, tippers and all manner of heavy machinery all converging on a very small section of Roman Rd which is going to severely influence traffic and air pollution levels - not to mention the ongoing noise pollution from the construction work itself.

Building on the Garden centre site and the greenfield sites between Roman Road and the A12(128 and 079a fig 7.2) is bound to cause significant and ongoing disruption to all existing residents of Ingatestone and Mountnessing.

The introduction of this volume of households will surely place an unbearable strain on the existing transport infrastructure - parking at Ingatestone station is already problematic and seats on the train practically non-existent. Further the educational, medical and social infrastructure of Ingatestone and Mountnessing will also be sorely tested by the introduction of this volume of households.

The volume of traffic running through Ingatestone High St already leads to congestion and danger to pedestrians - this will only increase with the introduction of more households and 'employment' property. There's very limited parking in the centre of the village already and competition for those places will only increase - with out any increase in provision (not practically possible) there will simply be an increase in cars parking outside legally specified parking areas.

Clearly any significant construction project is also going to add to traffic levels with lorries, tippers and all manner of heavy machinery all converging on a very small section of Roman Rd which is going to severely influence traffic and air pollution levels - not to mention the ongoing noise pollution from the construction work itself.

Please see email sent 6.3.16

We feel that the number of sites for development area too many in such a small area. It will change the face of our village forever. Traffic and lack of facilities will impact on the lives of current dwellers.

Objection to use of land on Ingatestone Garden Centre for housing

I have lived at for 54 years and I consider the land at the back of my garden to be green belt land. I have previously registered my objections to building new houses on the land and the current plan does nothing to change my mind or alleviate any fears.

I believe that the site is not a proper brown field site, it is green field being made into brown field for the purposes of development.

The whole character of the landscape will change if you build houses on the land. The building of so many new homes in close proximity would be out of character to the environment . New homes would stick out like a sore thumb and become an eye sore. I currently have trees and greenland at the back of my garden and I do not want to have new homes invading my privacy and as stated above , looking out of character to the current surroundings.

The area is currently a place of habitat for many wildlife and mature trees, surely builders cannot just come in and take all of this away with no respect.

There has been a history of flooding in the area around Burnt House Lane. Several years ago we were issued with flood boards from the council. If trees and natural vegetation are removed there is a risk that this could result in increased flooding of the area. It would seem inappropriate and of major concern if the trees on the boundary to the properties on Burnt House Lane that have a past history of flooding were removed. I am really concerned about these issues and cannot see anything concrete in the revised plan to reassure me on this issue. It is vital that this is looked into closely.

I am very concerned about ruining the local environment and the village character. I would like to see Ingatestone / Mountnessing left as villages in their own right and not joined with Brentwood / Shenfield. This is a major concern. I note there is already agreement for housing in Mountnessing, surely this is a substantial enough quota for such a small village are area. Anything above and beyond will merge the villages together.

I do not understand from reading the plan, how a proper infrastructure will be created to support additional housing. There is already a stretch on local schools and an extremely busy GP surgery, not to mention congestion on the roads and a busy train station.

I have concerns about entry / exit routes to a housing development as the current entrance to the garden centre would not be suitable for a housing development. It is a busy road and there are serious safety issues that need to be addressed , along with consideration of the current speed limit.

I feel very strongly about all of the issues above, and wish to register my objection.

1- I object to the number of houses proposed for the Garden Centre site as these will inevitably be for families but the current schools in the area are at capacity, and so is the doctors surgery. Also the parking situation is unsuitable in the villages.

2- I also object to this area being used by council works traffic etc as this will have a disastrous effect on our village of Ingatestone. The current level of traffic through the village is high and with any new houses will only get worse with nowhere to park.

Ingatestone and Mountnessing cannot sustain the addition of a further 60 homes on the site of the Garden Centre (site ref 128).

Train transport infrastructure (parking and seat availability) cannot support this additional demand. Nor can the educational and medical infrastructure of these parishes accommodate the increase in demand that would come with the addition of this housing.

The High Street is already congested and has limited paid and free parking. Site traffic will increase congestion and danger to pedestrians during build and add to pressure on the High Street if it were to continue to a finished site with the addition of a further 60 households cars.

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.

The village of Ingatestone is too small to keep providing local amenities to a growing population. It is a quiet village with a country, close community atmosphere, the more these houses are built, the me less this village will thrive.

It is particularly unfair on those backing onto this site who bought their houses for its quiet location.

Our concern is where access would be for all vehicles entering and leaving the site during the build and when the accomodation is completed the vehicles owned and needed by the residents access.

Policy 9.8 is contravened by the building of Site 079c, 079a, 128,034, 087 and 235 and the already approved Mountenessing roundabout development. These would produce coalescence/continuous build-up from the north end of Ingatestone village along an A12/B1002 corridor with very few open spaces.
Policy 10.7 (Infrastructure and Community facilities) is not addressed for the potential building of 128 new dwellings (Sites 042,098,179a,128) plus already approved houses at Mountnessing Toby Priory and Mountenssing roundabout. If all were permitted there would be the necessity for significant expansion of GP centres, Primary and Secondary School classrooms and sports ground within the near-locality of Ingatestone/Mountnessing. If any of these sites is developed, appropriate additional Medical Facilities and School classrooms/sports grounds should be in place before or at the same time and not after any new dwellings become occupied.
Policy 10.8 (Communal Open Space) is not addressed for Sites 079a and 128. Communal Open Space e.g. public cafeteria, play area etc, should be required for these developments if they are permitted. (No significant Communal Open Space was created within the recent Heybridge Hotel, Ingatestone development; this oversight should not be repeated). Since 079a, 079c and 128 have the potential for creating dangerous road conditions at road junctions and A12 slip roads. Lorries exiting Site 079c would create unacceptable danger at this road junction which has a "blind" approach from both directions west and east.
Policy 6.3 and 10.11 are contravened by proposals for sites 079a, 079c and 128. Sites 079a and 079c are located immediately next to A12 which will become even busier with the construction of the Lower Thames Crossing. Site 128 is within 30 metres of the A12. While Air pollution is considered in the Draft Plan (but not evaluated for these sites), noise pollution is not mentioned, but is a significant factor for these three sites, and should be properly taken into account.
Policy 10.2 (Parking) is not addressed. Sites 079a, 128 and Mountnessing Toby Priory and Mountnessing roundabout developments have the potential for creating c.300 extra cars (estimated 1 1/2 cars per dwellings) using Ingatestone village centre/station car park. A proper assessment and solutions should be made for car parking in the village centre and station; the number of new dwellings permitted should be reduced to prevent congestion in the village centre. If any of these sites and/or site 042 is allowed, at least average 1 1/2 on-site car parking spaces per dwelling should be specified to avoid on-street parking. (There is now significant on-street parking on the A12 access road along Roman Road from the recent Heybridge hotel, Ingatestone development, either because insufficient on-site spaces were provided or residents are not using the provided on-site parking spaces due to a high density of the dwellings).
Policy 10.13 Site 042 is prone to flooding; a proposed "solution" for a "tank" is unacceptable as it does not account for an alternative when the tank is full.
Policy 7.3 Proposals for Site 042 are for higher than appropriate residential density on a site with restricted access. The wood copse at the eastern end of Bell Mead should be retained as "Open Space" to conform to Policy 10.8 and to separate any new development from Fairfield flats.
Policy 9.8 Site 128 contravenes the village coalescence policy.
Policy 6.3 and 6.4 Crossrail Park and Walk from Site 034, 087,234: Significant danger to pedestrians would be created by the proposal because of the twists, "blind corners", narrow railway bridges and lack of pavement along Alexander Lane (Policy 6.4). Altering the configuration of Alexander Lane would contravene its rural nature, Policy 6.3. A more suitable site for a car park or a less dangerous pedestrian access route should be found, e.g. a pedestrian tunnel under the railway on to Long Ridings Avenue.
Before the number and density of new houses on Officers Meadow are agreed, assessment should be made of the impact how many new classrooms and additional sports field will be required to accommodate the additional children attending Shenfield School. These new classrooms and additional sports field should be completed before or at the same time as the houses become occupied.

Having been to the local meeting, read through the plan document, I am writing to place on record my objections to the plans related to Ingatestone etc.
Ingatestone is supposed to be a village made up of a community that cares about its environment, plus many residents are commuters to London and are very pleased to return to a place of tranquility and country air after hours spent in London etc. Your outline plans are taking this away from us and will just turn Ingatestone into a 'feeder' town like Brentwood, which has already been ruined by past planning decisions. You plan to build 170 homes in Mountnessing on 2 sites, 60 houses on the site of the Ingateston Garden Centre (ref 128), 42 houses beside the A12 (ref 079A) at the entry to Ingatestone from Mountnessing, as well as an Industrial Estate (ref 079C) in the same area of this entry to the village, which will have a detrimental effect on the impression of the village atmosphere and reduce the appeal of Ingatestone, as somewhere to live that is different from surrounding towns. This is all extra to the infill plans that are about in Ingatesone for more houses and flats - 2 office buildings have applied to be changed into apartments, giving an extra 9 properties, plus an increase in apartment above shops another 4 at least, The Crown to become 4 apartments or more, 16 houses (ref 042) beside the doctor's surgery and 10 houses (ref 098) planned for Ingleton House, where will the old people be placed if this happens and they lose their homes? All these properties will have a minimum of 1 car each and many of the houses will have 2, including the houses planned for Mountnessing - could be an extra 300 cars, at least, at a stroke within the area- where will they all park when they use facilities in Ingatestone - we have no room now
The public bus services is not reliable or convenient for enough people not to need their cars to get to trains or shops, when needed to either Shenfield or into Ingatestone, especially, as people do not like walking too far when we have weather problems and certainly not back from shops carrying heavy bags etc.
 Industrial Estate:
The idea of this type of development is ridiculous as the one that had permission on the site of the old scrapyard in Mountnessing, beside the roundabout on the A12, never happened despite changes made to the plans, as presumably there was no demand to develop. To move it down to the edge of Ingatesone is madness, as all heavy vehicles and vans and other traffic to and from such an estate would need to travel through Mountnessing, past schools and houses with the risk that many of the vehicle movements will also travel through Ingatestone, which could not cope with these types of vehicles and volumes of extra traffic. Plus at most of the residents in this area work away from the village you will just be bringing more traffic into an area already not suitable for these extra volumes, as well as increasing traffic from all the extra houses planned to no real benefit of local people. As I pointed out in the previous paragraph, a number of offices have applied for a change of use to apartments, thus reducing the appeal of Ingatestone for a commercial use!
 Infrastructure
Why you think we need more houses in this area defeats me as the infrastructure is not there to cope with more people. Starting with sewers and other utilities currently overstretched, the doctor's surgery is already struggling to keep up and would find it hard to cope with many more patients, schools will be overloaded with extra children, shops would lose trade as parking becomes impossible. Trade has already started to go from the shops with the closure of Barclays Bank, which used to be a draw for customers of these shops. The other major problem is the current roads are not built to take account of all this extra traffic plus there is no extra space for parking in Ingatestone. The footpaths in Ingatestone are already much too narrow in places for pedestrians to pass each other, especially older residents using disability vehicles/walking frames etc causing others to step into the road, which could be the cause of accidents with more vehicles movements, especially commercial vans and lorries.
 Dunton New Town
This is the place for you to build more of your homes' target etc. as the A127 will probably have an upgraded link to the M25, when the new Dartford Crossing is built, with the feeder road planned to be via this new link. Another 500 houses built there would take pressure of other areas in the borough like Ingatestone and all the new facilities would presumably be in place to help this new development. This way you would keep many of the problems outlined above in one area, which would be much more cost effective and manageable.
 Green Belt
You mentioned in your planning document that the Green Belt is in place for many reasons but 1 in particular is to prevent "Ribbon development" yet your plan for Brentwood through to Ingatestone goes against the advice. Once the Officers Meadows site in Shenfield is built with some 600 houses planned, there will be houses linked from Brentwood Town Centre through to Ingatestone, again making this area look very much like a suburb of London!! Plus what chance that more of these Shenfield residents decide to drive to Ingatestone - more cars in the village more pressure on parking etc. We lose our village community more and more!
I hope my comments are useful for when you come to consider The Local Plan further and you then give more consideration to the problems in Ingatestone, as well as considering the opportunities to develop more in an area with less issues.

As one of the local Councillors for Ingatestone, Fryerning & Mountnessing, I would like to take the opportunity to comment on two of the proposals for the Ward currently under consultation, without fettering my discretion, in case I am appointed a Member on the Planning and Licensing Committee in the near future.

I refer in each case to the Brentwood Draft Local Plan and give the appropriate page number.

Page 185:
Site Ref 128: Ingatestone Garden Centre (60 homes);

The Garden Centre has been a well used and valued amenity within the ward for over 75 years, providing employment and service facilities. There is a perception within the community that the current owner bought this viable concern and "ran it into the ground," with the overall intention of using the site for housing development.

Whilst I hesitate to echo residents' comments about the current owner's original intentions, I would like to raise my concerns about the appropriateness of this site for potentially 60 new dwellings:

(1) The site is situated between the A12 and the railway line between London and Colchester: A noisy environment by any standards;

(2) There is the issue of Sustainability: The local Primary and Junior Schools are currently over-subscribed, as are the nearest local Doctor's surgeries in Ingatestone and Shenfield. There is also the issue of sewage capability within the area, which I understand from Anglian Water is currently up to capacity.

Both of these issues, in my opinion, should be given material weight when Officers are considering recommendations for either approval or refusal.

Page 186:

Site Ref 079A: Land adjacent to Ingatestone by-pass (part bounded by Roman Road) 42 homes:

Please refer to the same concerns addressed above with regards to noise levels for future tenants and Sustainability, as mentioned regarding the Ingatestone Garden centre proposal.

I object completely to housing development on the garden centre Ingatestone our village will not cope with it doctors,schools ,parking etc!

Site Reference 079A - this area is green belt land and I object to this being changed.
Site Reference 079C - this area is also green belt land and therefore as above I object to this being changed.
Site Reference 128 - I object to this site being used for housing when there was a going concern which was used by the community as a garden centre.
The café was always busy, being used by: local nursing homes taking residents for lunches, afternoon teas, etc.; by clubs, such as the knitting club weekly, to name but a few.
The centre itself was busy - Xmas being a prime example - one weekend there were loads of Xmas trees the following weekend when I went to buy mine they were all gone!
As far as I am aware no one had any idea it was about to close, the local population was still turning up to use it after it was shut and not even the employees themselves appeared to know.
If, as we have been told, it was because the owner had run out of money, then I am wondering why he did not try to sell it as a going concern (ie a garden centre). He has not even tried to sell off his stock in a closing down sale. It feels to me (perhaps cynically!) that it was to force the hand of Brentwood Council in granting the planning application. I shall be sad if this is allowed to happen.
A question re Site reference 128 and 079C
I am even more confused - why does one business closes down (ie the garden centre - Site Reference 128 - which gave employment) and another area (Site Reference 079C) have a proposed change of use in order to give employment? What is stopping the 'Proposed Employment Site - 079C of being put onto Site Reference 128 which is already an employment site rather than changing the use of the green belt land?

Site Reference 079A - this area is green belt land and I object to this being changed.
Site Reference 079C - this area is also green belt land and therefore as above I object to this being changed.
Site Reference 128 - I object to this site being used for housing when there was a going concern which was used by the community as a garden centre.
The café was always busy, being used by: local nursing homes taking residents for lunches, afternoon teas, etc.; by clubs, such as the knitting club weekly, to name but a few.
The centre itself was busy - Xmas being a prime example - one weekend there were loads of Xmas trees the following weekend when I went to buy mine they were all gone!
As far as I am aware no one had any idea it was about to close, the local population was still turning up to use it after it was shut and not even the employees themselves appeared to know.
If, as we have been told, it was because the owner had run out of money, then I am wondering why he did not try to sell it as a going concern (ie a garden centre). He has not even tried to sell off his stock in a closing down sale. It feels to me (perhaps cynically!) that it was to force the hand of Brentwood Council in granting the planning application. I shall be sad if this is allowed to happen.
A question re Site reference 128 and 079C
I am even more confused - why does one business closes down (ie the garden centre - Site Reference 128 - which gave employment) and another area (Site Reference 079C) have a proposed change of use in order to give employment? What is stopping the 'Proposed Employment Site - 079C of being put onto Site Reference 128 which is already an employment site rather than changing the use of the green belt land?

See attached

See attachment

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.

1) Stream - there is a stream that passes through our land and currently when there is a lot of rain, I have to rake the grill due to too many leaves and other items from the Garden Centre floating. If we are away this has flooded the drive and over spills into Burnthouse Lane. Our concern is that with building work this would cause more debris and therefore impact further on the work we have to complete and risk more flooding down the drive onto the main roads.
2) Flooding - not only do we have flooding from the stream which we believe the trees that surround the property assist greatly with. The concern is that these trees are not on our land but the Garden Centre's land. We have great concerns these will be cut down as very established and therefore our garden will become permanently flooded. Also we can see the land to the left of us and when there is a lot of rain there are extremely large pools of water where there is clearly no natural drainage.
3) Traffic - Currently there is an excess amount of traffic daily using Burnthouse Lane as a cut through. Already many of these cars speed. This will then increase the traffic on a road that is quiet narrow with cars parked. The other road of concern is Roman Road. There is again a lot of cars that speed as soon as they pass the obstacles of parking outside Heybridge estate. At weekends there is often high static traffic going to the refuge area so to add more cars going into an estate should be concerned.
4) Wildlife - there is an abundance of wildlife that use the lad behind the Garden Centre and even the train line does not put them off. I have no idea if there are any endangered species but that amount of wildlife shows that they need to go somewhere.

See attached.

See attached.

Having lived in Ingatestone for over 20 years and witnessed first hand the progressive strain on village services and infrastructure, I am extremely concerned about the proposals for an additional 128 residential dwellings and the very negative/serious detrimental impact this will have on services, infrastructure, traffic and parking.

It is also extremely concerning that although we are told that the draft Local Plan is currently only a proposal, the Ingatestone Garden Centre has already closed, which is the proposed site for 60 of the proposed new residential dwellings.

While I accept the case for some new dwellings, 128 is excessive and must be reduced by at least 50%.

My partner and I live in the area, our objections are as follows.
1. To not spoil the village with extra houses being built
2. Burnthouse Lane is a very busy road at the moment without having extra traffic.
3. My garden which backs onto the garden centre has so much wildlife (foxes, badgers and hedgehogs etc) which we will lose. We also have a variety of beautiful birds.

I should like to comment on the proposed development of Ingatestone Garden Centre, which I have done previously.
Having lived in this cul-de-sac for 45 years, whilst a very pleasant area in which to live, we know at first hand the problems encountered by surface water flooding and building 60? houses on this site would only exaccerbate this.
What has up to now been a pleasant Garden Centre has been deliberately turned into nothing short of a rubbish dump and the site further on, ie Bushcade, is also accumulating mountains of gravel for whatever reason to further add to the flooding problem.
How will the extra traffic be accommodated? we are not only considering perhaps 2 cars per family, but also the ever increasing amount of internet delivery vans.
Hopefully the right conclusion will be reached.

If development is planned on green belt land I will object very strongly.The government is responsible for green belt to be protected & should be sacrosanct.I would also object on the grounds that the current infrastructure of the village could not cope with an extra 118 homes & the families.

I am happy that Bell Mead however should go ahead.

Site Ref 079A and 128

We wish to make our views known about the proposed development for the land between Ingatestone and Mountnessing. Having attended one of the planning display evenings at Ingatestone Community Centre we were concerned to see that the Ingatestone Garden Centre is only one of three sites. It seems that the Roman Road area is a targeted area of ribbon development and the quantity of housing and proposed commercial change of land use on the field site where Roman Road meets Roman Road seems rather high in such a small area.

The housing that was placed on the Heybridge Hotel several years ago was of such a high density that the houses were squashed into very small spaces resulting in an overspill of cars onto Roman Road. The planners had not considered the number of cars per home.

Our locality has yet again been identified in the plan for 42 houses on a green field site that will literally be next to the A12. The Ingatestone Nursery Site of 60 dwellings will be sited on a very busy slip road of the A12. We live directly abutting the site and are fully aware of the constant flood issues under the nearby railway bridge. What will become of the additional water created that will also be exacerbated by the increase in concreate? The garden centre was not a brown field site but green belt and a thriving business.

We noticed on our visit to the display of plans that there is a further proposed site for commercial development on Roman Road. Is this an appropriate site for such development? Green fields create space, homes for wildlife and are aesthetically essential to the well being of current residents. It appears that all of the sites have been placed in a very small area causing a complete change in appearance to our village. With the proposed development in Shenfield one long urban conurbation will link the villages of Ingatestone, Mountnessing and Shenfield.

Having read the Development Plan we noticed that it states that there are good transport links in our locality. The bus service is scant and the train is hourly. There are two village schools and one small GP practice. How will the current infrastructure cope with the burden of approximately 400 new residents?

We appreciated that housing needs to be built as indeed our own children were forced to move away but we would ask for consideration to the number of sites in such a small area.

I have read the revised proposals and still have very serious concerns about development, specifically in relation to the land at Ingatestone Garden Centre and more generally about supporting infrastructure and services.

New homes on the land on Ingatestone Garden Centre

The proposal to use the land at Ingatestone Garden Centre for housing still raises serious cause for concern in a number of areas. Our view is that the proposal would demonstrably harm the amenities enjoyed by local residents, in particular , valuable green space, trees and protected wildlife and the privacy and the right to enjoy a quiet and safe residential environment. We strongly object to planning proposals.

Character of the landscape
At the moment the border of the proposed plan that is adjacent to Burnt House Lane is densely populated with trees, removal of the tree line will totally change the character of the land. At present the land is pleasing on the eye and seen as green belt (not brown belt), putting a housing development there will completely change the look and feel of the area.

My family purchased our house because of the secluded nature and the fact that our garden looks out onto Greenland (woodland area of garden centre). We believe that building new homes in close proximity would be out of character to the current surroundings and we are concerned regarding the look of the landscape and privacy. The proposed development would not result in any benefit to the environment; in fact to the contrary it would lead to the loss of valuable green space and potentially new homes crammed in together. The building of so many new homes in close proximity to each other would be out of character to the environment of Ingatestone and in particular the surrounding houses in Burnt House Lane and Heybridge that are primarily 1960's build and consist of many bungalows.


Wildlife / environment
The redevelopment of the garden centre will mean removing the existing greenery and possibly removing the trees thus not respecting the habitat and environment. We suspect that there are trees that should be listed under tree preservation orders, and will be extremely interested in the developed plans outlining whether any of the trees will be left alone (in particular the trees on the boundary of the Burnt House Lane properties). There are some particularly large trees on the plot and the proposed development would impact upon the root stock of the trees, either during or after construction.

We, along with other residents have had newts, badgers, foxes and slow worms in our gardens as a direct result of their natural habitat (the green land of the proposed plot). It is a real concern that the wildlife and protected species will be disrupted and or harmed.


Safety concerns
There has been a history of flooding in the area around Burnt House Lane. If trees and natural vegetation are removed there is a real risk that this could result in increased flooding of the area. There would need to be a proper risk assessment undertaken to ensure that past issues will not reoccur, the area may not be currently classed as high risk now due to the growth of trees and greenery that have mitigated some of the problem. It would seem inappropriate and of major concern if the trees on the boundary to the properties on Burnt House Lane that have a past history of flooding were removed.

The access road into the entrance of the Garden Centre is currently inadequate to cope with the proposed number of houses and subsequent increase in traffic, there are real road safety concerns. We have real concern that the current road (set at the national speed limit in order to join the A12) would serve as the main access / egress point , causing major road safety implications. This will be aggravated by the current location of the Bushcade Lorry Depot, at present we have a high volume of HGV lorries which travel at speed into the location. How will this safety concern be mitigated ?

General issues re infrastructure
We are really concerned about additional pressure to existing essential services; doctors, schools and transport. My children attend Mountnessing Primary school and it is near capacity, where will all the new families send their children to school ? An increase in the population will force residents to send their children to schools outside of Ingatestone, surely this is detrimental to the ethos of a village community. The area will expand to the point that there will no longer be a village feel or concept.

At the moment it is difficult to get a doctor's appointment within a few days , development will increase the issues.

There will be an additional strain on passengers / trains running from Ingatestone during rush hour which are already packed most days, there have been a couple of occasions where we haven't been able to board the train.

Although there is reference in the proposals to supporting infrastructure , this just seems to be lip service rather than anything concrete or credible. The area does not have the supporting services to deal with an increased population, it just about manages now. There is no use building new homes and then infrastructure further down the line, the infrastructure needs to be in place to support development prior to new homes being built.

Although it has been woven throughout other issues, we want to highlight that Mountnessing / Ingatestone currently has a village look and feel, please don't change it to its detriment. It is a lovely area and over development will spoil it. This has potential over time to merge the villages into Chelmsford / Shenfield.

I have read the revised proposals and still have very serious concerns about development, specifically in relation to the land at Ingatestone Garden Centre and more generally about supporting infrastructure and services.

New homes on the land on Ingatestone Garden Centre

The proposal to use the land at Ingatestone Garden Centre for housing still raises serious cause for concern in a number of areas. Our view is that the proposal would demonstrably harm the amenities enjoyed by local residents, in particular , valuable green space, trees and protected wildlife and the privacy and the right to enjoy a quiet and safe residential environment. We strongly object to planning proposals.

Character of the landscape
At the moment the border of the proposed plan that is adjacent to Burnt House Lane is densely populated with trees, removal of the tree line will totally change the character of the land. At present the land is pleasing on the eye and seen as green belt (not brown belt), putting a housing development there will completely change the look and feel of the area.

My family purchased our house because of the secluded nature and the fact that our garden looks out onto Greenland (woodland area of garden centre). We believe that building new homes in close proximity would be out of character to the current surroundings and we are concerned regarding the look of the landscape and privacy. The proposed development would not result in any benefit to the environment; in fact to the contrary it would lead to the loss of valuable green space and potentially new homes crammed in together. The building of so many new homes in close proximity to each other would be out of character to the environment of Ingatestone and in particular the surrounding houses in Burnt House Lane and Heybridge that are primarily 1960's build and consist of many bungalows.


Wildlife / environment
The redevelopment of the garden centre will mean removing the existing greenery and possibly removing the trees thus not respecting the habitat and environment. We suspect that there are trees that should be listed under tree preservation orders, and will be extremely interested in the developed plans outlining whether any of the trees will be left alone (in particular the trees on the boundary of the Burnt House Lane properties). There are some particularly large trees on the plot and the proposed development would impact upon the root stock of the trees, either during or after construction.

We, along with other residents have had newts, badgers, foxes and slow worms in our gardens as a direct result of their natural habitat (the green land of the proposed plot). It is a real concern that the wildlife and protected species will be disrupted and or harmed.


Safety concerns
There has been a history of flooding in the area around Burnt House Lane. If trees and natural vegetation are removed there is a real risk that this could result in increased flooding of the area. There would need to be a proper risk assessment undertaken to ensure that past issues will not reoccur, the area may not be currently classed as high risk now due to the growth of trees and greenery that have mitigated some of the problem. It would seem inappropriate and of major concern if the trees on the boundary to the properties on Burnt House Lane that have a past history of flooding were removed.

The access road into the entrance of the Garden Centre is currently inadequate to cope with the proposed number of houses and subsequent increase in traffic, there are real road safety concerns. We have real concern that the current road (set at the national speed limit in order to join the A12) would serve as the main access / egress point , causing major road safety implications. This will be aggravated by the current location of the Bushcade Lorry Depot, at present we have a high volume of HGV lorries which travel at speed into the location. How will this safety concern be mitigated ?

General issues re infrastructure
We are really concerned about additional pressure to existing essential services; doctors, schools and transport. My children attend Mountnessing Primary school and it is near capacity, where will all the new families send their children to school ? An increase in the population will force residents to send their children to schools outside of Ingatestone, surely this is detrimental to the ethos of a village community. The area will expand to the point that there will no longer be a village feel or concept.

At the moment it is difficult to get a doctor's appointment within a few days , development will increase the issues.

There will be an additional strain on passengers / trains running from Ingatestone during rush hour which are already packed most days, there have been a couple of occasions where we haven't been able to board the train.

Although there is reference in the proposals to supporting infrastructure , this just seems to be lip service rather than anything concrete or credible. The area does not have the supporting services to deal with an increased population, it just about manages now. There is no use building new homes and then infrastructure further down the line, the infrastructure needs to be in place to support development prior to new homes being built.

Although it has been woven throughout other issues, we want to highlight that Mountnessing / Ingatestone currently has a village look and feel, please don't change it to its detriment. It is a lovely area and over development will spoil it. This has potential over time to merge the villages into Chelmsford / Shenfield.