I am writing to object to the inclusion of the Honeypot Lane site (022) being included in the Local Development Plan.
1. The traffic caused by 200 extra houses plus a care home would cause a dramatic increase in traffic in all the local roads. Traffic at peak times is already very heavy and causes long tail backs at all junctions leading onto London Road. Honeypot Lane is already a cut-through from London Road to Weald Road and traffic still speeds through the road ignoring the 20 mph speed limit. There would be major problems with traffic wherever the entrance to the site was located. All adjacent roads and Homesteads Estate would become a traffic 'rat run'. There are many safety risks and extra pollution.
2. This is important Metropolitan Green Belt land and I feel strongly that such land should be protected.
3. Local schools and doctors surgeries have no capacity to support the additional residents.
4. Site was previously rejected as it did not meet the Council's Spatial Strategy - nothing has changed.
5. The development would cause flooding and drainage problems in the area. The gardens in some houses backing onto the site already experience problems.
6. This is not a good choice for such a development. A deeply flawed plan.
Please take my views into consideration.

I am writing to object to the inclusion of the Honeypot Lane site (022) being included in the Local Development Plan.
1. The traffic caused by 200 extra houses plus a care home would cause a dramatic increase in traffic in all the local roads. Traffic at peak times is already very heavy and causes long tail backs at all junctions leading onto London Road. Honeypot Lane is already a cut-through from London Road to Weald Road and traffic still speeds through the road ignoring the 20 mph speed limit. There would be major problems with traffic wherever the entrance to the site was located. All adjacent roads and Homesteads Estate would become a traffic 'rat run'. There are many safety risks and extra pollution.
2. This is important Metropolitan Green Belt land and I feel strongly that such land should be protected.
3. Local schools and doctors surgeries have no capacity to support the additional residents.
4. Site was previously rejected as it did not meet the Council's Spatial Strategy - nothing has changed.
5. The development would cause flooding and drainage problems in the area. The gardens in some houses backing onto the site already experience problems.
6. This is not a good choice for such a development. A deeply flawed plan.
Please take my views into consideration.

I am writing to object to the inclusion of the Honeypot Lane site (022) being included in the Local Development Plan.
1. The traffic caused by 200 extra houses plus a care home would cause a dramatic increase in traffic in all the local roads. Traffic at peak times is already very heavy and causes long tail backs at all junctions leading onto London Road. Honeypot Lane is already a cut-through from London Road to Weald Road and traffic still speeds through the road ignoring the 20 mph speed limit. There would be major problems with traffic wherever the entrance to the site was located. All adjacent roads and Homesteads Estate would become a traffic 'rat run'. There are many safety risks and extra pollution.
2. This is important Metropolitan Green Belt land and I feel strongly that such land should be protected.
3. Local schools and doctors surgeries have no capacity to support the additional residents.
4. Site was previously rejected as it did not meet the Council's Spatial Strategy - nothing has changed.
5. The development would cause flooding and drainage problems in the area. The gardens in some houses backing onto the site already experience problems.
6. This is not a good choice for such a development. A deeply flawed plan.
Please take my views into consideration.

I am writing to object to the inclusion of the Honeypot Lane site (022) being included in the Local Development Plan.
1. The traffic caused by 200 extra houses plus a care home would cause a dramatic increase in traffic in all the local roads. Traffic at peak times is already very heavy and causes long tail backs at all junctions leading onto London Road. Honeypot Lane is already a cut-through from London Road to Weald Road and traffic still speeds through the road ignoring the 20 mph speed limit. There would be major problems with traffic wherever the entrance to the site was located. All adjacent roads and Homesteads Estate would become a traffic 'rat run'. There are many safety risks and extra pollution.
2. This is important Metropolitan Green Belt land and I feel strongly that such land should be protected.
3. Local schools and doctors surgeries have no capacity to support the additional residents.
4. Site was previously rejected as it did not meet the Council's Spatial Strategy - nothing has changed.
5. The development would cause flooding and drainage problems in the area. The gardens in some houses backing onto the site already experience problems.
6. This is not a good choice for such a development. A deeply flawed plan.
Please take my views into consideration.

I am writing to object to the inclusion of the Honeypot Lane site (022) being included in the Local Development Plan.
1. The traffic caused by 200 extra houses plus a care home would cause a dramatic increase in traffic in all the local roads. Traffic at peak times is already very heavy and causes long tail backs at all junctions leading onto London Road. Honeypot Lane is already a cut-through from London Road to Weald Road and traffic still speeds through the road ignoring the 20 mph speed limit. There would be major problems with traffic wherever the entrance to the site was located. All adjacent roads and Homesteads Estate would become a traffic 'rat run'. There are many safety risks and extra pollution.
2. This is important Metropolitan Green Belt land and I feel strongly that such land should be protected.
3. Local schools and doctors surgeries have no capacity to support the additional residents.
4. Site was previously rejected as it did not meet the Council's Spatial Strategy - nothing has changed.
5. The development would cause flooding and drainage problems in the area. The gardens in some houses backing onto the site already experience problems.
6. This is not a good choice for such a development. A deeply flawed plan.
Please take my views into consideration.

I am writing to object to the inclusion of the Honeypot Lane site (022) being included in the Local Development Plan.
1. The traffic caused by 200 extra houses plus a care home would cause a dramatic increase in traffic in all the local roads. Traffic at peak times is already very heavy and causes long tail backs at all junctions leading onto London Road. Honeypot Lane is already a cut-through from London Road to Weald Road and traffic still speeds through the road ignoring the 20 mph speed limit. There would be major problems with traffic wherever the entrance to the site was located. All adjacent roads and Homesteads Estate would become a traffic 'rat run'. There are many safety risks and extra pollution.
2. This is important Metropolitan Green Belt land and I feel strongly that such land should be protected.
3. Local schools and doctors surgeries have no capacity to support the additional residents.
4. Site was previously rejected as it did not meet the Council's Spatial Strategy - nothing has changed.
5. The development would cause flooding and drainage problems in the area. The gardens in some houses backing onto the site already experience problems.
6. This is not a good choice for such a development. A deeply flawed plan.
Please take my views into consideration.

I am writing to object to the inclusion of the Honeypot Lane site (022) being included in the Local Development Plan.
1. The traffic caused by 200 extra houses plus a care home would cause a dramatic increase in traffic in all the local roads. Traffic at peak times is already very heavy and causes long tail backs at all junctions leading onto London Road. Honeypot Lane is already a cut-through from London Road to Weald Road and traffic still speeds through the road ignoring the 20 mph speed limit. There would be major problems with traffic wherever the entrance to the site was located. All adjacent roads and Homesteads Estate would become a traffic 'rat run'. There are many safety risks and extra pollution.
2. This is important Metropolitan Green Belt land and I feel strongly that such land should be protected.
3. Local schools and doctors surgeries have no capacity to support the additional residents.
4. Site was previously rejected as it did not meet the Council's Spatial Strategy - nothing has changed.
5. The development would cause flooding and drainage problems in the area. The gardens in some houses backing onto the site already experience problems.
6. This is not a good choice for such a development. A deeply flawed plan.
Please take my views into consideration.

I am writing to object to the inclusion of the Honeypot Lane site (022) being included in the Local Development Plan.
1. The traffic caused by 200 extra houses plus a care home would cause a dramatic increase in traffic in all the local roads. Traffic at peak times is already very heavy and causes long tail backs at all junctions leading onto London Road. Honeypot Lane is already a cut-through from London Road to Weald Road and traffic still speeds through the road ignoring the 20 mph speed limit. There would be major problems with traffic wherever the entrance to the site was located. All adjacent roads and Homesteads Estate would become a traffic 'rat run'. There are many safety risks and extra pollution.
2. This is important Metropolitan Green Belt land and I feel strongly that such land should be protected.
3. Local schools and doctors surgeries have no capacity to support the additional residents.
4. Site was previously rejected as it did not meet the Council's Spatial Strategy - nothing has changed.
5. The development would cause flooding and drainage problems in the area. The gardens in some houses backing onto the site already experience problems.
6. This is not a good choice for such a development. A deeply flawed plan.
Please take my views into consideration.

See attached.

Brownfield site allocations: 311 Eagle & Child: This pub occupies a large site but in itself is not an attractive pub. There is another historic one nearby and too numerous food and alcohol outlets in the Shenfield Broadway area. 140 Chatham/Crown Street, 039 Westbury Road, 102 Hunter Avenue and 001 Brentwood Station car Parks: With an increased population envisaged and the demand for parking the redevelopment of these sites and elsewhere must be planned with these factors given priority. Greenfield land within Settlement Boundaries: 044 and 178 land at Priests lane. Development of this land is unavoidable if housing targets are to be met. 178 must take into account all the possible needs of Endeavour and Hogarth Schools. 044 Planned exit and a one through Bishop Walk are essential to spread the traffic load. Communication with St. Andrews Place must be avoided due to its bad sightline at its junction with Priests lane. A12 Corridor - urban Extensions: 022 Honeypot Lane. Excessive dense development to the boundary with the A12 should be avoided. the watercourse could be an attractive advantage to an attractive design. 263 east of Chelmsford Road. This is acceptable as it does not visibly affect views of Shenield housing, including from A1023. However it is essential that the BP garage with food outlet is included in the planning as currently traffic queing back onto the A1023 is a major road safety danger. 276, 034, 235 and 087 Officer's Meadow Area. Redevelopment of this area must be avoided since it forms an open "lung" in Shenfield which otherwise would become part of a brentwood/Shenfield conurbation as well as overloading the facilities in Shenfield. With good drainage a park and playing fields, which Shenfield lacks on any scale, should be considered. part of 034 could be joined with 263 satisfactorily. 037 is only a possibility for housing if this would not prejudice any future plans of Shenfield High School. 158 North of A1023 North of Shenfield. Redevelopment here is unsatisfactory for the same reasons as 276/235 above, again avoiding an overall Brentwood/Shenfield conurbation and housing up to the A1023 is undesirable as for 022 above. Dunton Hills garden Village. 200 This is essential to take main volume of the housing required. It must be well planned, with its own infrastructure and to help other area's local facilities being overwhelmed. General Comment. The above represents my comments on individual sites as a 70 year plus lifetime local residents. For those not mentioned I accept the site preference or for the larger Village sites I do not have enough local knowledge to comment. The sites in Ingatestone Village Service centre do not seem unreasonable.

I am objecting to the development of Land in Honeypot Lane for the following reasons. 1. The proposed site was originally rejected for development due to it not meeting the Council's Spatial Strategy. What has now changed? 2. The area is Metropolitan Green Belt. 3. there are already flooding and drainage issues in the area making it a very unsuitable site for housing. 4. Access to the site would probably be via Honeypot Lane which is in no way suitable for heavy vehicles transporting a vast quantity of building matterials. 5. The Homestead area off of Honeypot Lane are private roads which are not suitable for additional traffic and most certainly could not cope with a vast amount of HGV's. 6. Due to this plan and a number of other developments in the area the local roads, junctions and London Road would struggle to cope with extra traffic, in addition the development would be within touching distance of the A12/M12, very unfortunate for any residents. 7. Residential amenities in the area are already struggling. 8. Beechwood Surgery is currently quoting 3/4 weeks for an appointment, how much longer would we have to wait when a new estate's population is added? 9. What impact will it have on schools in the area? Only last year the building of an extra classroom at Saint Peters School was rejected due to building on Green Belt Land. How will the school cope with extra children that then new development would bring also additional children from proposed development in Nags Head Lane in the catchment area?

See attached.

See attached.

More traffic more noise, not enough parking, more disruption, Council taxes will go up in price as you will need more done and they do not maintain at the moment lots of pot holes too busy many cars (now schools too full). No fixed boarders so it will affect other green belt area. Hatch road is busy and dangerous already more traffic is not good (Sow n Grow has a established badger family settlement that has been there for years where the houses will be). The wildlife will be affected which affects the wild ecosystem. Keep Pilgrims Hatch rural a country town.

I live on the Homesteads Estate off Honeypot Lane. This will cause a massive increase in traffic in the area. There are already peak tail-backs at all junctions of our estate leading to London Road.
If the development goes ahead, Hill Road at the Honeypot road end should be blocked off. This would stop rat running. The residents pay £400 per year for upkeep of roads, verges, lighting and paths in addition to local authority rates [council tax].
The proposal would impact on the GP where we already have a 6 week wait.
The schools are full enough already.
It is important urban green belt land which should be retained.
The site was rejected in the past as it did not meet the council's spatial strategy.

I live on the Homesteads Estate off Honeypot Lane. This will cause a massive increase in traffic in the area. There are already peak tail-backs at all junctions of our estate leading to London Road.
If the development goes ahead, Hill Road at the Honeypot road end should be blocked off. This would stop rat running. The residents pay £400 per year for upkeep of roads, verges, lighting and paths in addition to local authority rates [council tax].
The proposal would impact on the GP where we already have a 6 week wait.
The schools are full enough already.
It is important urban green belt land which should be retained.
The site was rejected in the past as it did not meet the council's spatial strategy.

I live on the Homesteads Estate off Honeypot Lane. This will cause a massive increase in traffic in the area. There are already peak tail-backs at all junctions of our estate leading to London Road.
If the development goes ahead, Hill Road at the Honeypot road end should be blocked off. This would stop rat running. The residents pay £400 per year for upkeep of roads, verges, lighting and paths in addition to local authority rates [council tax].
The proposal would impact on the GP where we already have a 6 week wait.
The schools are full enough already.
It is important urban green belt land which should be retained.
The site was rejected in the past as it did not meet the council's spatial strategy.

I live on the Homesteads Estate off Honeypot Lane. This will cause a massive increase in traffic in the area. There are already peak tail-backs at all junctions of our estate leading to London Road.
If the development goes ahead, Hill Road at the Honeypot road end should be blocked off. This would stop rat running. The residents pay £400 per year for upkeep of roads, verges, lighting and paths in addition to local authority rates [council tax].
The proposal would impact on the GP where we already have a 6 week wait.
The schools are full enough already.
It is important urban green belt land which should be retained.
The site was rejected in the past as it did not meet the council's spatial strategy.

I live on the Homesteads Estate off Honeypot Lane. This will cause a massive increase in traffic in the area. There are already peak tail-backs at all junctions of our estate leading to London Road.
If the development goes ahead, Hill Road at the Honeypot road end should be blocked off. This would stop rat running. The residents pay £400 per year for upkeep of roads, verges, lighting and paths in addition to local authority rates [council tax].
The proposal would impact on the GP where we already have a 6 week wait.
The schools are full enough already.
It is important urban green belt land which should be retained.
The site was rejected in the past as it did not meet the council's spatial strategy.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.