Ingatestone is a very small village that just doesn't have the capacity to cope with more people. The infrastructure, schools, doctors, station, roads are just not able to cope. Ingatestone also has a unique village character that would be irreversibly destroyed.

flooding and A12 access is a concern.

This site again is far too close to the A12. Hazardous to health. Be kind to people!

ideal location for development

Good brownfield site for development, self contained with good access to main roads.

Such a dramatic increase in new residential properties in Ingatestone Village must result in significant additions to the supporting 'infrastructure', including (but not limited to) car parking, sewage & grey water waste, NHS surgery, nursery & schools (all ages up to 18 years) and police presence.

ACTION - BRENTWOOD DISTRICT COUNCIL:
to make public the comprehensive plan to enhance Ingatestone's supporting infrastructure.

Green Belt Land - edge of Ingatestone: 079A - 57 units; 106 - 41 units; 128 - 120 units; Total 218. There is an identified need in Ingatestone & Fryerning Parish for affordable and social housing both for sale and for rent and with adequate parking.
A high proportion of the 4,785 residents are over 65 years old (25.5%)and there is a distinct lack of young people as they cannot afford to rent commercially or buy properties near their families and friends. The existing housing stock has 831 detached houses, representing 37.7% of dwellings (England average is 22.3%; 749 semi-detached houses ie 34% of dwellings (England average 30.7%); only 12.4% of are terraced houses as against an England average of 24.5% and as regards flats, there are 275 purpose built ones which is 12.5% of the dwellings (England average is 16.7%) and 64 flats are conversions which equates to 2.9% as against an England average of 5.4% Only 204 properties are social rented which is 9.7% of our households as against an England average of 17.7%, and a further 206 properties are privately rented - again, below the England average. We therefore need housing to be built that meets these identified needs ie small affordable units.
We do not need larger houses that most likely will attract outside buyers.
There should also be restrictions of sale and rent to people not connected to the locality. Local representation should be present at discussions with developers who show an interest in building these units. It is hoped that Housing Associations would be in the mix and properties should be of an interesting design and construction so as to leave a legacy to future generations. Ingatestone & Fryerning has three conservation areas from different periods that add value to the life of the villages.

We write with reference to the above document. We live at (xx address) and we object strongly to the proposed developments in our area. We already suffer from parking problems in Roman Road as a result of your Council's agreement to the over development of the old Heybridge Hotel site. You are now proposing to give permission to erect dense housing developments on three sites no's. 128, 106 and 079A on your draft plan, all of which have access on to the current very busy Roman Road. Your proposed density of these sites will obviously increase the parking problems on Roman Road making sight lines for drivers using or accessing this road increasingly more difficult. Ingatestone village itself already has parking problems as do our local doctors and schools. Also, our railway station car park is already virtually full every day. What facilities are the possible 500 to 700 new residents going to use? I can see no additional doctors surgeries, car parking, schools, bus services, amenity areas or local shops in this draft document. Also, the proposed industrial area, 079C, would be totally out of context with our village. We currently have a mix of small offices and businesses, which operate well within the the village community. Currently, our local industrial area is just outside Shenfield, which it would seem more logical to extend. I think that the residents of Ingatestone would like to keep Ingatestone the village that it is. I have lived in Ingatestone since 1945 and have seen the village change dramatically, not necessarily for the better, and feel that any further development on the scale suggested would be very much to its detriment. I hope you will consider our comments, forcing the developers to dramatically reduce the density of housing and not change the use of our current Green Belt boundaries. We believe that none of these sites are brownfield sites and we are sure that 079A and 079C are Green Belt land.

While instinctively I dislike the idea of the continual in-filling of green spaces, I recognise that the population of the world, the UK, and our area has grown tremendously in the past few years and so something has to be done to alleviate the pressure on housing.
If these areas must be developed, I would like to see serious efforts made to ensure that wildlife isn't adversely harmed too much, and that green areas, ponds, lakes and new trees are part of any changes made. The building work currently occurring at the Mountnessing roundabout by the A12 appears to be taking into account none of these factors - it seems that as many houses as possible are being squeezed into the available space.
My objection, therefore, relates to the amount of people you propose to house on the various sites. Even a relatively small housing development can benefit enormously from having some green space, perhaps some water, and a small copse of trees (perhaps ones that don't grow especially tall but still provide a sense of something not purely urban - like the ones alongside the southbound A12 slip-road at Ingatestone). The addition of paths and tracks would also be very welcome, and would provide people with access to these small pockets of greenery amidst the new housing.
I'd hope you'd look at what cities like New York and Seoul have done in turning disused railways and roads into green areas in which people can walk, run or cycle. Closer to home, the idea of a Green Corridor in Romford, which produced Rise Park and Rafaels Park, is a good example of how developments can have a positive impact on their surroundings. The point that such developments demonstrate is that even very small pockets of greenery, especially trees, can provide huge environmental, health and wellbeing benefit. I recognise that except for the Dunton Garden Village (where there is no excuse for not planning something fit for a better future), the developments on this plan are relatively small, but that doesn't mean that trees, bushes, paths, etc. can't be included. Just a small number of the right kind of plants, trees and bushes can have an enormously beneficial impact for wildlife and therefore the natural environment. As just one such idea, all the proposals that border the A12 should be lined by trees - this would make them more pleasant places to live and could end up increasing the number of trees in those areas.
If these planned developments end up the way the one in Mountnessing seems to be turning out - lots of houses squashed in to a small piece of land next to the busiest of roads -- I think the character of Brentwood and its surrounding villages will be lost. If, however, we take the opportunity to develop housing that balances the need for housing stock with the need to develop mindfully, we could end up with some attractive homes in new housing estates that would be good for wildlife and people.

Although we are not happy with all the extra housing proposed for the above areas, all of which will come off the already busy Roman Road, we appreciate there must be some additional housing in the village.

Our concerns are of course:-

1. how the doctor's surgery will cope with the extra people.
2. too many properties proposed for each development.
3. The access on to the already very busy and often dangerous Roman Road and traffic driving into the village above 30miles an hour.
4. Lack of parking in the village to visit shops and doctors
5. Since, the development on the (old Heybridge Moathouse) land has been built the road is dangerous due to the parked cars on both sides of the road,(as there is not enough parking on this small and over developed area of land) including on many days up to 9 vans of various sizes and the speed of traffic negotiating through them, which will get a lot, lot worse with all this proposed development.

1. Under Infrastructure Planning relating to schools it appears that responsibility is with Essex Council, this seems an abdication of responsibility. They may have final say but personally I think they are too remote from the ground level needs and have no confidence that they will get it right.
2. There is no mention of highways, with such an increase in housing Road connections need proper assessment. This applies to the whole plan. You only need to look at road traffic information during rush hour and school pick up times to see there is a 'peek time' issue.
3. Parking is a major issue. Add more houses at a distance from Ingatestone shops and the already critical situation is made worse when they want to get into the Village. Also parking issues for those needing the surgery, dentist and schools. Added to which there is only a half hourly bus with beginning/end of day restrictions. Those employed in the Village are already parking beside Seymour Field. During the day the Village is often clogged up.
4. My understanding of the Mountnessing end of the Village is that it is not just surface water issues but main drainage servicing the existing properties that is an issue.
5. Housing needs to be affordable. Ingatestone like its neighbours has a aging population, new houses built recently are not affordable for most young people. We need to attract them to the Village.
6. Houses must not be crammed in such that there is no onsite parking. There needs to be off road space for at least two cars, assuming that both occupants are at work locally. If there are children there should be space for an additional car. Parked cars need to be kept off the roads, many roads are narrow and a large proportion of the existing housing stock has insufficient space for cars which is often more suitable for an Austin 7 than a modern car (i.e. small garage or short fore court). Also there would need to be more parking at the station for outlying commuters or an improved public system that obviated the need to use a car to get to the station.
7. Noted that some developments are adjacent to the A12, the issue of noise pollution needs addressing in planning considerations.

1. Under Infrastructure Planning relating to schools it appears that responsibility is with Essex Council, this seems an abdication of responsibility. They may have final say but personally I think they are too remote from the ground level needs and have no confidence that they will get it right.
2. There is no mention of highways, with such an increase in housing Road connections need proper assessment. This applies to the whole plan. You only need to look at road traffic information during rush hour and school pick up times to see there is a 'peek time' issue.
3. Parking is a major issue. Add more houses at a distance from Ingatestone shops and the already critical situation is made worse when they want to get into the Village. Also parking issues for those needing the surgery, dentist and schools. Added to which there is only a half hourly bus with beginning/end of day restrictions. Those employed in the Village are already parking beside Seymour Field. During the day the Village is often clogged up.
4. My understanding of the Mountnessing end of the Village is that it is not just surface water issues but main drainage servicing the existing properties that is an issue.
5. Housing needs to be affordable. Ingatestone like its neighbours has a aging population, new houses built recently are not affordable for most young people. We need to attract them to the Village.
6. Houses must not be crammed in such that there is no onsite parking. There needs to be off road space for at least two cars, assuming that both occupants are at work locally. If there are children there should be space for an additional car. Parked cars need to be kept off the roads, many roads are narrow and a large proportion of the existing housing stock has insufficient space for cars which is often more suitable for an Austin 7 than a modern car (i.e. small garage or short fore court). Also there would need to be more parking at the station for outlying commuters or an improved public system that obviated the need to use a car to get to the station.
7. Noted that some developments are adjacent to the A12, the issue of noise pollution needs addressing in planning considerations.

1. Under Infrastructure Planning relating to schools it appears that responsibility is with Essex Council, this seems an abdication of responsibility. They may have final say but personally I think they are too remote from the ground level needs and have no confidence that they will get it right.
2. There is no mention of highways, with such an increase in housing Road connections need proper assessment. This applies to the whole plan. You only need to look at road traffic information during rush hour and school pick up times to see there is a 'peek time' issue.
3. Parking is a major issue. Add more houses at a distance from Ingatestone shops and the already critical situation is made worse when they want to get into the Village. Also parking issues for those needing the surgery, dentist and schools. Added to which there is only a half hourly bus with beginning/end of day restrictions. Those employed in the Village are already parking beside Seymour Field. During the day the Village is often clogged up.
4. My understanding of the Mountnessing end of the Village is that it is not just surface water issues but main drainage servicing the existing properties that is an issue.
5. Housing needs to be affordable. Ingatestone like its neighbours has a aging population, new houses built recently are not affordable for most young people. We need to attract them to the Village.
6. Houses must not be crammed in such that there is no onsite parking. There needs to be off road space for at least two cars, assuming that both occupants are at work locally. If there are children there should be space for an additional car. Parked cars need to be kept off the roads, many roads are narrow and a large proportion of the existing housing stock has insufficient space for cars which is often more suitable for an Austin 7 than a modern car (i.e. small garage or short fore court). Also there would need to be more parking at the station for outlying commuters or an improved public system that obviated the need to use a car to get to the station.
7. Noted that some developments are adjacent to the A12, the issue of noise pollution needs addressing in planning considerations.

I have looked at the three sites in respect of INGATESTONE. I support the development of the sites abutting the A12 and the former Garden Centre. I have some reservations on the highways site and would object if it removed the recycling facility . It also risks removing the the green belt surrounding INGATESTONE and lead to further development along the A12

I wish to object to the preferred site allocations - site references: 079A /079C; 128; 106 - My objections are: They are green belt sites and therefore these should not be touched. The Government is very clear re protecting the green belt. Traffic is already very high due to the amount of development already in Ingatestone and Mountnessing. Services and infrastructure will be affected. For example the doctors surgery, sewage. Flooding may become an issue as more land is built on. The A12 is struggling to cope now with problems occurring most days not to mention the surface which is fast deteriorating. Due to the problem on this road we are now seeing more and more large lorries coming through the village which causes more problems.

This site map ref 79A has boundaries on three sides with busy roads the A12, B1002 Roman Road and the B1002 slip road onto the A12. The B1002 to Mountnessing and the B1002 slip roads are the relief roads for the A12 when traffic is diverted off this major road. The slip road is very busy during the morning particularly between 7.00 a.m. 8.30 a.m. with traffic in both directions. Overspill of cars from the Harebridge development park in this road as the site does not have adequate parking. If this proposed site79A, is developed and parking overspills into the slip road this will impede traffic in both directions. The extra vehicles from the development from Ingatestone Nursery, if permission is granted, will add to the volume of traffic using this road. Any pedestrian from this proposed site 79A will have to cross either the slip road or the B1002 to Mountnessing to get into Ingatestone there are no pedestrian crossings on either road. Road noise from the three surrounding roads, one of which is elevated and looks down onto this site, must be taken into consideration and gardens on this site will be subject to noise day and night. Traffic noise from the A12 is heard in the gardens of the properties opposite this site. The air quality on this site particularly when the wind is blowing from the A12 needs to be considered. The two green islands separating the slip road from the old route of A12 must be protected as open space. Ingatestone has been subject to development at Bell Mead and The Crown and with proposed developments at the Garden Nursery and the proposed developments in Mountnessing parking is already at a premium now in Ingatestone where are the additional vehicles supposed to park when coming into the village to shop or work?

I write on behalf of our Client CALA Homes (North Home Counties) Ltd in response to your Council's Regulation 18 Consultation on the Brentwood Draft Local Plan: Preferred Site Allocations (January 2018).

We submitted representations in response to your previous Regulation 18 consultation in March 2016 which were strongly supportive of the Council's decision to allocate Site 079A (land adjacent to Ingatestone by-pass) as a Green Belt release in the emerging Brentwood Local Plan. Our previous representations were supported by a number of technical studies which we trust the Council has found helpful in supporting its decision to allocate the site.

Through the technical work undertaken to date, it has been demonstrated that the site is sustainable; can be well integrated into the existing transport network; is suitable for development in terms of noise and vibration levels; and can be developed in a way that will enhance the ecological value of the site. We have also demonstrated through the design work undertaken that the site is capable of delivering approximately 57 market and affordable homes together with public open space and an area of children's play for the benefit of both new and existing residents living in the local area.

We are pleased to note that this design work has been recognised by the Council, and the site is now identified in the Preferred Site Allocations (January 2018) as offering an indicative yield of 57 dwellings.

We wish to reiterate our strong support for the proposed allocation of Site 079A, and we look forward to continuing discussions with the Council with respect to bring the site forward for development at the earliest opportunity.

See attached.

See attached.

Site 079A: I feel the extra traffic and extra people to the area can't be accommodated properly and safely.

Infrastructure is deteriorating due to many matters being ignored but the major item is pressure on services, particularly medical. This pressure is due to busy development allowed in the recent 15 years in Ingatestone and Mountnessing. Parking is a major problem especially for older residents. Allowing development on the scale envisaged in 079A, 106, 128 is likely to have a total negative effect on Ingatestone generally. Give Ingatestone a break!

A group of us visited the council offices last month to view the plan for housing.
The Council seem to be hell bent on turning us all into an urban sprawl of "diddy" houses, if those at Mountnessing interchange are anything to go by. and without consideration for lack of infrastructure - ie lack of parking, small roads, surgeries bursting at the seams, lack of school places, clogged high streets, etc.
Shenfield high street is grid locked most of the time and the general consensus is that there seems to be lack of common sense and forethought where planning is concerned, nothing is people friendly or convenient.
With regard to Ingatestone nursery site surely no one will ant to live between a railway and the A12 and by a rubbish tip! If the latter is removed there will be fly tipping everywhere!! All new residents will have cars which will clog up the roads & high streets, & add to lack of parking - traffic is horrendous as it is, & slip roads and roundabout are becoming extremely dangerous.
Rumour has it that Mountnessing school is to be extended - pick up parking will be an absolute nightmare causing traffic jams in & out of Ingatestone, We really want to reserve our village atmosphere. Common sense must prevail!!