1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.


2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.


3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity; they are vulnerable to global extinction and are identified in the Red List of Endangered Species. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites.

4. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


5. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


6. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


7. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would may result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


8. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


9. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.

My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.


2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.


3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity; they are vulnerable to global extinction and are identified in the Red List of Endangered Species. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites.

4. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


5. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


6. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


7. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would may result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


8. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


9. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.

My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.


2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.


3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity; they are vulnerable to global extinction and are identified in the Red List of Endangered Species. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites.

4. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


5. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


6. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


7. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would may result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


8. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


9. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.

My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.


2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.


3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity; they are vulnerable to global extinction and are identified in the Red List of Endangered Species. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites.

4. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


5. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


6. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


7. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would may result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


8. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


9. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.

My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.


2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.


3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity; they are vulnerable to global extinction and are identified in the Red List of Endangered Species. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites.

4. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


5. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


6. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


7. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would may result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


8. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


9. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.

My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.


2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.


3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity; they are vulnerable to global extinction and are identified in the Red List of Endangered Species. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites.

4. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


5. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


6. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


7. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would may result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


8. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


9. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.

My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.


2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.


3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity; they are vulnerable to global extinction and are identified in the Red List of Endangered Species. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites.

4. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


5. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


6. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


7. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would may result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


8. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


9. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.

My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.


2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.


3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity; they are vulnerable to global extinction and are identified in the Red List of Endangered Species. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites.

4. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


5. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


6. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


7. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would may result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


8. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


9. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.

My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.

2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.

3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity, and they are vulnerable to global extinction. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites. It is also within a priority area for the Lapwing bird species and has records of Corn Bunting and Yellow wagtail sightings in the last 10 years which are all protected species under the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2010) and Biodiversity Action Plan UK listed species (Please see attachment 1).


4. The site is also recorded as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone as of 2017, which may cause potential problems surface and groundwater contamination as a result of the proposed development (Please see attachment 2 for site designations).


5. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


6. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


7. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


8. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


9. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


10. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.




My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

A recent study by the CPRE the State of Brownfield 2018, has highlighted that more should be done to develop brownfield rather than release greenbelt for housing.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.

2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.

3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity, and they are vulnerable to global extinction. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites. It is also within a priority area for the Lapwing bird species and has records of Corn Bunting and Yellow wagtail sightings in the last 10 years which are all protected species under the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2010) and Biodiversity Action Plan UK listed species (Please see attachment 1).


4. The site is also recorded as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone as of 2017, which may cause potential problems surface and groundwater contamination as a result of the proposed development (Please see attachment 2 for site designations).


5. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


6. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


7. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


8. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


9. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


10. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.




My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

A recent study by the CPRE the State of Brownfield 2018, has highlighted that more should be done to develop brownfield rather than release greenbelt for housing.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.

2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.

3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity, and they are vulnerable to global extinction. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites. It is also within a priority area for the Lapwing bird species and has records of Corn Bunting and Yellow wagtail sightings in the last 10 years which are all protected species under the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2010) and Biodiversity Action Plan UK listed species (Please see attachment 1).


4. The site is also recorded as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone as of 2017, which may cause potential problems surface and groundwater contamination as a result of the proposed development (Please see attachment 2 for site designations).


5. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


6. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


7. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


8. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


9. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


10. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.




My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

A recent study by the CPRE the State of Brownfield 2018, has highlighted that more should be done to develop brownfield rather than release greenbelt for housing.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.

2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.

3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity, and they are vulnerable to global extinction. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites. It is also within a priority area for the Lapwing bird species and has records of Corn Bunting and Yellow wagtail sightings in the last 10 years which are all protected species under the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2010) and Biodiversity Action Plan UK listed species (Please see attachment 1).


4. The site is also recorded as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone as of 2017, which may cause potential problems surface and groundwater contamination as a result of the proposed development (Please see attachment 2 for site designations).


5. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


6. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


7. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


8. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


9. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


10. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.




My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

A recent study by the CPRE the State of Brownfield 2018, has highlighted that more should be done to develop brownfield rather than release greenbelt for housing.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.

2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.

3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity, and they are vulnerable to global extinction. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites. It is also within a priority area for the Lapwing bird species and has records of Corn Bunting and Yellow wagtail sightings in the last 10 years which are all protected species under the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2010) and Biodiversity Action Plan UK listed species (Please see attachment 1).


4. The site is also recorded as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone as of 2017, which may cause potential problems surface and groundwater contamination as a result of the proposed development (Please see attachment 2 for site designations).


5. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


6. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


7. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


8. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


9. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


10. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.




My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

A recent study by the CPRE the State of Brownfield 2018, has highlighted that more should be done to develop brownfield rather than release greenbelt for housing.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.

2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.

3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity, and they are vulnerable to global extinction. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites. It is also within a priority area for the Lapwing bird species and has records of Corn Bunting and Yellow wagtail sightings in the last 10 years which are all protected species under the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2010) and Biodiversity Action Plan UK listed species (Please see attachment 1).


4. The site is also recorded as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone as of 2017, which may cause potential problems surface and groundwater contamination as a result of the proposed development (Please see attachment 2 for site designations).


5. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


6. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


7. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


8. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


9. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


10. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.




My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

A recent study by the CPRE the State of Brownfield 2018, has highlighted that more should be done to develop brownfield rather than release greenbelt for housing.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.

2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.

3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity, and they are vulnerable to global extinction. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites. It is also within a priority area for the Lapwing bird species and has records of Corn Bunting and Yellow wagtail sightings in the last 10 years which are all protected species under the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2010) and Biodiversity Action Plan UK listed species (Please see attachment 1).


4. The site is also recorded as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone as of 2017, which may cause potential problems surface and groundwater contamination as a result of the proposed development (Please see attachment 2 for site designations).


5. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


6. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


7. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


8. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


9. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


10. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.




My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

A recent study by the CPRE the State of Brownfield 2018, has highlighted that more should be done to develop brownfield rather than release greenbelt for housing.

1. I object to the allocations of 076 and 077 on grounds of excessive development in Blackmore Village - the proposed sites represent over 28% increase in houses in the village which is unsustainable. Of the proposed sites listed in 'Green Belt - Larger Villages' section of the LDP, nearly 70% of the proposed houses are in Blackmore and Tipps Cross Ward (116 houses out of a total of 169). This is an excessive and unwarranted increase for this small historic village which cannot be justified. In contrast neighbouring villages such as Doddinghurst have no proposed sites for development. Blackmore has limited facilities and is fairly isolated from major centres, with poor public transport services.

2. The sites 076 and 077 are Green Belt fields with the protection that designation provides - development should only be considered in exceptional circumstances. Green Belt was established to protect the boundary of built development of the village and the open countryside.

3. The proposed development will cause degradation of environment and damage to wildlife. Site 076 is home to many rare birds which are protected species such as skylark, barn owls and turtle doves which are regular visitors to the field in question.

Turtle doves have been seen and heard on the site for the past 3 years and field 076 is a known breeding site for turtle doves. The turtle dove is a Section 41 species which is of principal importance for conservation of biodiversity, and they are vulnerable to global extinction. They have suffered a 91% UK population decline since 1995. More than half the remaining turtle doves breed in East Anglia with Essex being identified as one of the important 'hotspots'. The loss of this site to housing would inevitably mean the loss of this important breeding site and further loss of appropriate habitat. Turtle doves favour wide undisturbed field margins and this is not the sort of habitat which can be incorporated into housing development. Furthermore, the fact that the site is a breeding site for turtle doves raises the question as to what other species exist there. A detailed assessment of both site 076 and 077 should be undertaken to establish the ecological importance of the sites; such assessments should not be left until the planning application is submitted as it may result in the site being undeliverable and therefore Brentwood Borough Council will not be able to meet their housing requirements in respect of these sites. It is also within a priority area for the Lapwing bird species and has records of Corn Bunting and Yellow wagtail sightings in the last 10 years which are all protected species under the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2010) and Biodiversity Action Plan UK listed species (Please see attachment 1).


4. The site is also recorded as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone as of 2017, which may cause potential problems surface and groundwater contamination as a result of the proposed development (Please see attachment 2 for site designations).


5. The fact that Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, runs East/West to the north of the village seems to have been used to justify the allocations 076 and 077 as appropriate pieces of land.
These sites are not self-contained village infill as suggested in the LDP- the sites are on open land outside the village, and the road which is being viewed as a border -Red Rose Lane - is a narrow country lane and unsuitable for anything other than light traffic. When these sites are viewed in reality rather than on a plan, the area is open countryside and a very important part of the Green Belt.


6. Infrastructure - Red Rose Lane which borders the proposed development is a narrow country lane unsuitable for heavy traffic. Blackmore is surrounded by minor roads and is unsuited to the large increase in traffic that this development would bring. There are already problems with parking and congestion around the village shop and this will be greatly exacerbated by the proposed increase in housing.


7. Traffic - access to the sites from Red Rose Lane will be difficult and dangerous due to narrow nature of lane. In particular, if site 076 is accessed through Orchard Piece this will cause greatly increased traffic flow in what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac and will cause a danger and disturbance to current residents and their children.


8. School - Blackmore has a small primary school which is currently at capacity. Proposed development would put excessive pressure on school and facilities, and would result in insufficient spaces being available for the children of the village.


9. Health and transport - no GP surgery within parish boundary, and nearest GP surgery is full to capacity with considerable problems obtaining appointments at short notice. Bus services which link the village to Chelmsford and Brentwood are part time only.


10. Flooding - Red Rose Lane is often subject to flooding in times of heavy rain. A site immediately adjacent to field 076 (site 250 Post Field) was rejected for development on the grounds of flooding and surface water problems. Field 076 is actually lower lying and Red Rose Lane in the area of Red Rose farm has become impassable at times due to flooding. Development would make flooding worse as green field land would be lost to housing and hard-standing.

If the development attempted to address the flooding and surface water issue by the creation of a pond for instance this would make the housing targets undeliverable.




My objections are supported by the response of Blackmore Parish Council. I urge Brentwood Borough council to reconsider these allocations and retain this important section of Green Belt land. Whilst recognising the pressure for additional housing more assessment should be carried out on brownfield land or within larger settlements which are more accessible with better facilities, or within the larger new Dunton Hills Garden village settlement.

A recent study by the CPRE the State of Brownfield 2018, has highlighted that more should be done to develop brownfield rather than release greenbelt for housing.

I am writing to Brentwood Council to raise an objection to the plans put forward by Brentwood County Council to build in both Blackmore (Woollard Way and Orchard Piece sites) and Tipps Cross, Hook End. I live with my husband and two children aged XX and XX in Blackmore and have been a resident here for just over 18 years. I acknowledge that it is a desirable community to live in and feel lucky to do so and raise a family here. However, since I have lived in the village there have been many changes and resources taken away. The recycle bins have been removed, we have lost a pub, a butchers, a library (mobile one is to reduce to and become every 3 weeks and for only 1 hour), The Old School building, the church has a part time vicar now who also runs Stondon Massey church and we have very poor mobile phone reception. People do not want to take part in village life. They use it as a commuter town. Having lost the above mentioned services 96 more houses in the village will mean that there are more need for such services and we will not be able to meet them. The bus service is very poor and does not run regularly to either Chelmsford or Brentwood or in the evening or a Sunday. This limits job opportunities and education opportunities. The changes in the Transport Policies for getting Children to Secondary Schools in the Brentwood area, means I am now paying over £700 a year to send my XX year old to his catchment school with his older brother, who gets it free. The new houses will put pressure on the schools in the area. I work in Blackmore school and we are more or less full and there is no room to build. It is a very special school and part of the community. In a larger community it would lost it's unique place as a village school. There is also nowhere to add extra classrooms without losing fields for sport. The village is a conservation area in the centre and is part of our heritage in this country. I believe to build on the outskirts on valuable green belt land it will be an irreplaceable lost. It is land that can be farmed. It is also giving Rural children a chance to grow up in a rural community. Any larger and it will become a town. Congestion on the roads will be a problem. All the roads are small roads and are not meant for heavy traffic. There is no parking in the village centre as it is and it is an accident waiting to happen near The tearooms and The Coop shop. There is no room to build a car park. The village has problems also with sewage and flooding so building house will increase the pressure on our services. The local Doctors surgery is over stretched too and appointments are hard to get. Increased demand will mean a service in the area that cannot meet the local populations needs. It also means it is a bus journey away. Recently there have been problems in the area with teenagers roaming the streets. Increased numbers of young people with very little to do in a small community will cause greater unrest in the village. We have no local Policeman and no Police station that will come and deal with the problems we face. There will also be disruption while it is built. These local roads and disruption of services will cause major problems for local residents, especially the elderly and young. Where do you go to get away from the noise, dust, mess when services are cut off? As a village we often have power cuts. Can the services cope with more housing? We also have a poor broadband service and mobile phone reception. Building at Tipps Cross means also an increase in demand for local services plus the loss of a popular recreation field that will be needed if we have an increase in population. I feel very strongly that although Brentwood maybe should supply more housing Blackmore is not the best place and by doing so the changes will be irreplaceable and the community here will be lost for ever.

Site Plan References 076, 077, 075B, 194, 294 085B: I have examined the Draft Local Plan and will restrict myself to commenting on the above sites, as I know the sites well. I wish to object strongly to the developments suggested at these sites, which would have a detrimental affect on the existing residents. Greenfield or Green Belt Land. I object to the use of Greenfield land for Housing use. The protection afforded was to prevent urban sprawl, which is precisely what this Plan achieves, contrary to the principle of the Green Belt. The Council do not appear to be prioritising brown field sites over development of Greenfield. Destruction of Habitats Several of the above sites are host to bats, owls, wild deer and badgers and a huge array of wildlife that will perish as a result of any development. Health The parish of Blackmore, Hook End and Wyatts Green health needs are served solely by The Deal Tree Health Centre. The Plan allocates at least another 160+ homes in the area served by this Health Centre. I know, from personal experience with appointments, that this centre is already "stretched", so another 400+ residents would mean existing residents health provision would suffer. There are currently no plans whatsoever to develop new healthcare with these very significant extensions of the population in the Parish. Infrastructure The roads in the parish of Blackmore, Hook End and Wyatts Green are already busy and Blackmore itself already experiences parking problems. The area, if developed, would require major upgrades to essential utilities for foul-water system, water supply, power, gas and communications. Transport There is currently a part-time bus service for parish of Blackmore, Hook End and Wyatts Green which has been continually under threat due to local authority funding. Any additional homes are going to create additional traffic, as there are no jobs proposed for the area or "senior" schooling, creating additional traffic flows and pollution to the degradation of the existing residents. Disruption The extent of the proposed expansion would lead to large-scale construction works over several years affecting, detrimentally, the local residents of the Parish quality of life. The issue of noise pollution, in particular, should be given weightier consideration than has been the case in the past. Blackmore Village - Site Plan 076 and 077 These sites are viable agricultural land once built upon would mean a permanent loss. Recently there has been an increase in the amount and frequency of floods locally and building on this land will risk a further increase in the severity of flood inundations extending to within the Conservation area, degradation of the environment and a disproportionate increase, around + 30%, in urbanisation of Blackmore Village. The recent development of Norton Heath Equestrian Centre by Epping Council, within a mile of the Village, will already negatively affect local traffic and healthcare provision. Tipps Cross - Sire Plan 294 and 085B The proposal of 20 dwellings can hardly be considered "infill". 085B provides the only recreational playing field locally and potentially threatens the future of an important local amenity, Tipps Cross Remembrance Hall. The density of the dwellings for both sites is also out of character with the local area. Unless adequate parking is provided, should this development proceed, it will result in an increase in pavement parking, prejudicing highway safety, already a problem in the Parish. Any such density would be overlooking adjoining properties and generate additional noise, disturbance and pollution.

Access constraints to roads that are already suffering from over-use, are narrow and dangerous. E.g. regarding site 077 - a particular problem as the road through the village is already very busy and passes by the local school. There are parking issues relating to this with a difficult junction from Redrose Lane. Increase in speeding (already a problem).
Destruction of green belt environment and habitation of wildlife - a feature of village life and noticeably in decline. The piece of land - 077 - south of Redrose Lane supports diverse wildlife - skylarks, hedge-sparrows and owls - all these species are under threat. It also supports the many small mammals, insects and plants which provide their food-source.
Surface water drainage poor - localised flooding. Village lies in a valley where many local streams converge - also source of river Wid.
Lack of infrastructure.
Pressure on village amenities and local school, doctors, etc.
Increase in traffic and pollution, Pollution from rubbish is already a significant problem - also fly-tipping. The amount of rubbish already dumped along the lanes and in ditches is shameful.
Increase in use of cars to access railway stations, towns, schools, etc. Subsequent further damage to very poorly maintained lanes/roads.
Many cycling clubs/running clubs/walkers/horse-riders etc. use the surrounding lanes - this is already a dangerous problem - more cars - more chances of accidents. Few pavements and lighting.
Working on an average of (say) 3 per household - both sites would increase the village population by at least 300, lack of infrastructure to support such an increase. Additional households will subsequently attract more traffic/parking problems.
Destruction of village life - village will increasingly become a 'commuter' settlement.
Broadband coverage is extremely poor.
If the idea is to attract young property buyers, there is nothing to attract them in Blackmore - this would lead to more car-usage to access towns.

General Comment

People tend to come and live in this area for 'village' life and the surrounding countryside. Although it is accepted there is a housing problem, this has to be carefully considered to prevent destruction of the 'village' life people are attracted to. Any large development would seriously detract from the benefits of living here and subsequently drive away those who already live here happily, and have done so for some time, therefore shifting the balance in age-groups, demographics which at present co-exist quite happily.

I have various objections relating to the housing proposal 1) Road system is far too small to be able to sustain congestion that additional housing will attract. 2) Parking in the village is already an issue /problem as people need to drive in and out for general supplies /groceries etc already a number of homes have multiple cars usage which results in cars not being able to be contained onto owner's driveways so already parking in the road side which creates problems for pedestrians and other passing motorists or emergency vehicles which is a concern. 3) Cars and Lorries that travel through our community do not stick to the 30mph speed limit. So, it is also hazardous in just walking as we have limited pavements and lighting. 4) Blackmore is geographically situated in a dip/basin, when we have average rainfall we are susceptible to flooding. If more concrete is poured into our green belt land where does the run-off water disperse? The current drainage system cannot cope already, reason as already highlighted, we are situated in a bowl. 5) Overhead power lines are poorly maintained, and substations keep failing we have had a significant number of power surges and cuts to our electrical supply over the last twelve months alone. Any extra power needs can only result in us suffering more cuts unless the entire system is massively overhauled /updated. Who pays?. 6) We have a poor local public transport system ie so we could hardly be considered a commuter area; you need a car to survive. 7) Local school unable to accept / accommodate the current needs of the village, understand there is a significant waiting list. 8) Doctor surgery you can wait up to 2 weeks to see a doctor again with the level of people currently living here let alone any increase. 9) Any new arrivals would have to pay above average house costs so cannot see how it could be justified as affordable housing. The only winners here are the developers who will sell properties to large private run landlords who will rent out at exorbitant rents. 10) We pay a high rate of tax to live in a rural setting and yet we don't get the benefits that a town dweller would expect. 11) I believe the infrastructure within our community is unable to sustain the large growth that has been proposed and any developer will only want to build houses and will not want to contribute main changes to Utilities, Gas, Electric, water and drainage or road systems all they will want to do is build and move on with no regard to the current residents needs or concerns. And if you, the council, will not listen to our objections in the first place what hope will we have that you will remedy and issues that need to be addressed. 12) Do understand the council have been put under pressure by the Government to provide new homes but let's be real here and not just have a knee jerk reaction, with only just small term gains. There is no real forward planning involved, nor any understanding how 96 houses will impact our precious little community. 13) I do know & appreciate that changes have to occur but feel a more serious approach should be looked at. What type of community would you like your children to be brought up in... a rushed dangerous road, no means of public transport, limited schools and poor health service. I know what I would want, not what you are proposing, it sound horrendous with no long-term winners.

As a resident of Blackmore for many years I am at a loss to know how the local infrastructure will cope with the additional housing proposed. Currently the village is served by a temporary bus service, a poor broadband facility (currently under review by BT) one general store with limited space when requiring postal services.
We have noticed an increased tendency to floods in the village and waste services are at full capacity with a number of blockages to drains.
The village school is at full capacity with no potential to extend the facilities to accommodate further children. The surrounding schools are in a similar positions (I know this as my wife is a Head Teacher in one of the neighbouring village schools and she is having to increase her capacity at present as the villages are at breaking point for school places.
I also attended the meeting a few years ago when it was proposed to build on these sites with Housing Association partnership and it was refused following consultation with the residents and those reasons have not changed.
My concerns are solely with the facilities currently available to the Blackmore residents and I have not seen anything in the proposals to address and improve or add to the current provision to accommodate the proposed increase.

Any development on this land will result in more footfall of traffic hurtling down School Road which is already a traffic hazard at the best of times, let alone with the actual construction and development of the land which should be retained for grazing purposes/field use. You have refused to implement any kind of traffic control despite the parish council asking for this, and it will result in accidents and worse still fatalities.

I am writing with connection to your planning policy for our little village
(Blackmore)
I feel that the infrastructure is just not available in our village We have had a invasion of travellers over the last few years and this has put our school at maximum capacity People that live in our village cannot get there own children into our school.
Also you have just given permission to the owner of Norton Heath riding school to build about 25 four bedroom houses that's another 100 odd people!
We have a very limited bus service that doesn't even run on a Sunday Please take all this into consideration I honestly believe that it would be a mistake to build in the centre of our village.

I am writing with connection to your planning policy for our little village
(Blackmore)
I feel that the infrastructure is just not available in our village We have had a invasion of travellers over the last few years and this has put our school at maximum capacity People that live in our village cannot get there own children into our school.
Also you have just given permission to the owner of Norton Heath riding school to build about 25 four bedroom houses that's another 100 odd people!
We have a very limited bus service that doesn't even run on a Sunday Please take all this into consideration I honestly believe that it would be a mistake to build in the centre of our village.

I am writing with connection to your planning policy for our little village
(Blackmore)
I feel that the infrastructure is just not available in our village We have had a invasion of travellers over the last few years and this has put our school at maximum capacity People that live in our village cannot get there own children into our school.
Also you have just given permission to the owner of Norton Heath riding school to build about 25 four bedroom houses that's another 100 odd people!
We have a very limited bus service that doesn't even run on a Sunday Please take all this into consideration I honestly believe that it would be a mistake to build in the centre of our village.

My objections are as follows:

I don't feel that the current infrastructure could tolerate all the added pressures. The additional costs to bring everything required, to a viable standard would be extortionate. I believe it would be more prudent to add more housing to a newly planned infrastructure such as being proposed at Dunton Hills Garden Village. The overall costs to do such would be far less.

Infrastructure that I'm concerned with:

School...I've heard it said by some village folk that they've had to put their children into Doddinghurst School, as the school here in Blackmore is at full capacity and has a waiting list. Whilst at the Tipps Cross meeting recently I believe I heard the Council representative say to someone that they will be expecting to make provision for 25 extra children, with the anticipated new build. If the size of our village is to increase by approximately 28%, then those figures don't add up. If there are 175 children in the school now and it doesn't have the capacity to take all the children already living in the village, then 28% housing increase would surely suggest a minimum of 50 extra children. How will the current village school cope? The school would surely need to expand.

Doctors...My husband recently had to wait two weeks for a doctor's appointment. How much more strain will this put on the current facility?

Roads/Parking...96 extra homes could easily mean a minimum of another 96 cars in the village and this number could quite easily be doubled. Their visitors would also add to this number. This could put extra strain overflowing onto our roads that already have excessive parking problems from the influx of cars that visit the village, let alone those that permanently reside here. (There are 6 vehicles connected to the house opposite me, two of which are parked on the road. More repetition of this scenario could have serious consequences. Young people want to own a vehicle for themselves...and why shouldn't they aspire to this!)

Drainage...We are already having problems with areas that flood because of problems with natural drainage in the village, due to the village being built in a bowl. There seems to be concerns amongst villagers that flooding could increase with more concreted areas and less natural drainage.

Affordable Housing... 'If', this is the plan, this location in my estimation is not ideally suited. Employment here is extremely limited. Homes would be better built in commuter belt locations where there are local job opportunities with good supporting networks of public transport. Affordable homes would be better served if built on the edge of larger towns or cities, therefore making it unnecessary to have the extra expense of vehicle ownership, with all its associated hefty running costs,

As said, surely it would be far more cost effective to add these extra 96 houses to a brand-new infrastructure that has been purpose built to accommodate all the extra facilities/utilities. Bolting on new systems to an already overstretched infrastructure would require extensive investment. Who would be responsible for this huge bill...the Property Developers or the Council? Or, would the village just have to deteriorate and suffer?

Alternatively, build the houses on the edge of a large town, where city dwellers have no objections to living amongst large expanses of housing. People that live in this quaint little village have purchased a home here because they love 'small'. I along with numerous other villagers would request to keep it this way.

Many thanks for giving us the opportunity to make our voice heard. It is very much appreciated.

My objections are as follows:

I don't feel that the current infrastructure could tolerate all the added pressures. The additional costs to bring everything required, to a viable standard would be extortionate. I believe it would be more prudent to add more housing to a newly planned infrastructure such as being proposed at Dunton Hills Garden Village. The overall costs to do such would be far less.

Infrastructure that I'm concerned with:

School...I've heard it said by some village folk that they've had to put their children into Doddinghurst School, as the school here in Blackmore is at full capacity and has a waiting list. Whilst at the Tipps Cross meeting recently I believe I heard the Council representative say to someone that they will be expecting to make provision for 25 extra children, with the anticipated new build. If the size of our village is to increase by approximately 28%, then those figures don't add up. If there are 175 children in the school now and it doesn't have the capacity to take all the children already living in the village, then 28% housing increase would surely suggest a minimum of 50 extra children. How will the current village school cope? The school would surely need to expand.

Doctors...My husband recently had to wait two weeks for a doctor's appointment. How much more strain will this put on the current facility?

Roads/Parking...96 extra homes could easily mean a minimum of another 96 cars in the village and this number could quite easily be doubled. Their visitors would also add to this number. This could put extra strain overflowing onto our roads that already have excessive parking problems from the influx of cars that visit the village, let alone those that permanently reside here. (There are 6 vehicles connected to the house opposite me, two of which are parked on the road. More repetition of this scenario could have serious consequences. Young people want to own a vehicle for themselves...and why shouldn't they aspire to this!)

Drainage...We are already having problems with areas that flood because of problems with natural drainage in the village, due to the village being built in a bowl. There seems to be concerns amongst villagers that flooding could increase with more concreted areas and less natural drainage.

Affordable Housing... 'If', this is the plan, this location in my estimation is not ideally suited. Employment here is extremely limited. Homes would be better built in commuter belt locations where there are local job opportunities with good supporting networks of public transport. Affordable homes would be better served if built on the edge of larger towns or cities, therefore making it unnecessary to have the extra expense of vehicle ownership, with all its associated hefty running costs,

As said, surely it would be far more cost effective to add these extra 96 houses to a brand-new infrastructure that has been purpose built to accommodate all the extra facilities/utilities. Bolting on new systems to an already overstretched infrastructure would require extensive investment. Who would be responsible for this huge bill...the Property Developers or the Council? Or, would the village just have to deteriorate and suffer?

Alternatively, build the houses on the edge of a large town, where city dwellers have no objections to living amongst large expanses of housing. People that live in this quaint little village have purchased a home here because they love 'small'. I along with numerous other villagers would request to keep it this way.

Many thanks for giving us the opportunity to make our voice heard. It is very much appreciated.

My objections are as follows:

I don't feel that the current infrastructure could tolerate all the added pressures. The additional costs to bring everything required, to a viable standard would be extortionate. I believe it would be more prudent to add more housing to a newly planned infrastructure such as being proposed at Dunton Hills Garden Village. The overall costs to do such would be far less.

Infrastructure that I'm concerned with:

School...I've heard it said by some village folk that they've had to put their children into Doddinghurst School, as the school here in Blackmore is at full capacity and has a waiting list. Whilst at the Tipps Cross meeting recently I believe I heard the Council representative say to someone that they will be expecting to make provision for 25 extra children, with the anticipated new build. If the size of our village is to increase by approximately 28%, then those figures don't add up. If there are 175 children in the school now and it doesn't have the capacity to take all the children already living in the village, then 28% housing increase would surely suggest a minimum of 50 extra children. How will the current village school cope? The school would surely need to expand.

Doctors...My husband recently had to wait two weeks for a doctor's appointment. How much more strain will this put on the current facility?

Roads/Parking...96 extra homes could easily mean a minimum of another 96 cars in the village and this number could quite easily be doubled. Their visitors would also add to this number. This could put extra strain overflowing onto our roads that already have excessive parking problems from the influx of cars that visit the village, let alone those that permanently reside here. (There are 6 vehicles connected to the house opposite me, two of which are parked on the road. More repetition of this scenario could have serious consequences. Young people want to own a vehicle for themselves...and why shouldn't they aspire to this!)

Drainage...We are already having problems with areas that flood because of problems with natural drainage in the village, due to the village being built in a bowl. There seems to be concerns amongst villagers that flooding could increase with more concreted areas and less natural drainage.

Affordable Housing... 'If', this is the plan, this location in my estimation is not ideally suited. Employment here is extremely limited. Homes would be better built in commuter belt locations where there are local job opportunities with good supporting networks of public transport. Affordable homes would be better served if built on the edge of larger towns or cities, therefore making it unnecessary to have the extra expense of vehicle ownership, with all its associated hefty running costs,

As said, surely it would be far more cost effective to add these extra 96 houses to a brand-new infrastructure that has been purpose built to accommodate all the extra facilities/utilities. Bolting on new systems to an already overstretched infrastructure would require extensive investment. Who would be responsible for this huge bill...the Property Developers or the Council? Or, would the village just have to deteriorate and suffer?

Alternatively, build the houses on the edge of a large town, where city dwellers have no objections to living amongst large expanses of housing. People that live in this quaint little village have purchased a home here because they love 'small'. I along with numerous other villagers would request to keep it this way.

Many thanks for giving us the opportunity to make our voice heard. It is very much appreciated.

In respect of the above plan I am writing my objections to it. It seems that only yesterday I took part in a 10 year plan consultation process that was supposed to be the way forward. What a waste of time and energy.

As I and neighbours have been ignored by the planning committee previously and our objections have proved to be correct, I have little faith in the consultation process. It appears to be a paper exercise and another 'that box is ticked'.

I object in general to the proposals that impact on the villages and parishes, as if built, they will become towns. My main objection is to the planned sites at 076 and 077 as well as 075B. The objections range from the infrastructure, to primary school, doctors surgery, extra traffic, congestion, parking, road safety, local facilities, air and noise pollution, vandalism and the loss of community spirit where residents look out for each other to the loss of green belt land. I exercise by using Red Rose Lane as part of a circuitous route as I and other residents run around the village, dog walk and walk. The impact of this number houses on this community will be detrimental to the current residents.

The only winners in this plan are the developers and residents will have to pickup the cost of sustaining the other houses after they have taken their profits and run.

I know this will not be read but hope it will add another 1 to the number of those who oppose the development plan.

Thank you

John Lester

While not objecting to an increase in the number of houses in Blackmore it does seem essential that: 1 Houses meet the needs of first time buyers and end of lifers 2 Sewage infrastructure etc are adequate. Barely currently the case. 3 School places and medical facilities are adequate. Both of these are currently overloaded. 4 The number and style of houses are in sympathy with the surrounding roads. Is the Essex Design Guide still in use? The essential nature of an Essex village, albeit an enlarged one, is maintained.