Remove R25 and R26 from LDP. Consult BVHA Neighbourhood Plan for local development plan.

Extra traffic - roads already very busy. Extra population. Lack of supporting infrastructure.

Remove R25 and R26 from LDP. Consult BVHA Neighbourhood Plan for local change.

Lack of infrastructure - school / doctor places. Roads not fit for traffic.

Please refer to the BVHA Neighbourhood Plan

Local Plan is unsound. Blackmore is a small village and development of this size on Green Belt land is inappropriate. There is no consideration by Brentwood Council re: 30 houses built in Firgrith Hall Lane under Epping Council, all these homes will be using services of Blackmore i.e. doctor, shop, school - none of which can cope now. There are plenty of other urban sites that could take this development without ruining the local infrastructure as it would do in Blackmore. Why is Blackmore being targeted and other villages excluded, as well as this plan there are plans for additional homes on Chelmsford Road, Spriggs Lane that amount to 20 additional houses. Red Rose Lane is an unsuitable lane for this traffic, it floods and is unpassable every time we have heavy rain. There appears to be no clear strategy for the villages in this area and no discussions with Epping Council, as they border on the village.

Please refer to the BVHA Neighbourhood Plan.

Local Plan is unsound. Blackmore is a small village and development on green belt land is inappropriate. There is no consideration by Brentwood Council re: 30 houses in Fingrith Hall Lane. Under Epping Council, all these homes will be using Blackmore servives, doctors, shop, school. These cannot cope now. Red Rose Lane is not suitable for this amount of traffic. It often floods. There is no clear strategy for the villages in this area. No consultations with Epping Council which border village. There are other urban sites which could be developed. There is als other sites planned for development on Chelmsford Road, Spriggs Lane which amounts to 20 additional homes.

There is no clear strategy for the Villages .Including Blackmore. No account has been taken of the c.30 dwellings at the top end of Fingrith Hall Lane. Blackmore and the impact these will have locally. Blackmore is an isolated village within the Green Belt, with very poor local services. No Library, very poor bus service, congested village lanes, severe parking problems at peak times, long delays 5/4 weeks for the local Deal Tree Health center in Doddinghurst. Current primary school in need of development for any additional pupil intake. BBC has not shown that other brownfield sites are available. BBC has not shown that increased housing developments could be achieved by increasing housing density on other allocated sites. No Housing needs survey has been undertaken to show why Blackmore is included in the LDP. Local lanes are at capacity during peek travel times and the additional vehicle use of access to and from the site from Red Rose Lane opposite the Village Primary School will present significant traffic problems. There is inadequate provision for waste water removal in Blackmore. No report on these two sites in Blackmore have taken into account the biodiversity of impact on the local wildlife using these two greenfield sites which have not been in productive arable use for the last 20 years at least, and therefore are vital corridors for wildlife. Any development on these two greenfield sites will seriously affect the following bird species on the Birds of Conservation and Concern 4 (BOCC4) endangered listings. Red List . Starling, Song Thrush, House Sparrow, Tree Sparrow, Linnet, Twite, Yellowhammer. And on the BOCC4 Amber List. Dunnock, Bullfinch. All the above endangered species can been seen in and around these sites.

BBC planners should refer to the Blackmore Village neighbourhood plan, which was properly composed and states what the village and villagers need. Far too many of what might have been thought of as affordable, have been extended, modified to the maximum and are no longer affordable. There are very few properties left in Blackmore of smaller, single storey bungalow type. The sites R25 and R26 should be taken out of the local development plan for the reasons given.

BBC has not carried out a local survey recently relating to current housing needs of Blackmore village. BBC has no clear strategy for its villages and has not considered the available brownfield sites which are there and should take priority over development of greenbelt. The development is led by developers not thought through by BBC. BBC has not considered the adjacent authorities Plans - eg Epping Forest DC, who have permitted the building of about 30-40 dwellings at the top of Fingrith Hall, and have permission pending in Woolmongers lane. Both of these already will affect Blackmore village infrastructure. The proposed developments R25 and R26 look to access from Red Roe Lane which is extremely unsuitable both width and visibility wise. The construction of so many dwellings will overwhelm the Blackmore infrastructure. Our school is already full, the doctor surgery is difficult enough to get appointments now. Parking for our shops, cafes and pubs is already insufficient. The urban extension to Brentwood which is already planned could be extended and Blackmore is not a sustainable development as above.

Remove sites R25 and R26

I feel as though the Plan is unsound, is not legally compliant and fails to comply with the duty to cooperate for sites R25 and R26 for the following reasons: 1. The number of houses proposed is far too many for the small village. The parking in the village is chaotic at the moment without the proposed new developments. 2. Local school, pre-school and doctors are oversubscribed already. 3. New development will affect the wildlife. On many occasions I have seen barn owls flying around the proposed development. 4. Cyclist, walkers come to Blackmore village to escape the hustle and bustle of towns. The new developments will change the whole feel of the village. There are very few, small, unspoilt villages left. 5. In the past the village has been flooded. The site proposed are liable to flooding. 6. More houses means more cars means more pollution. People come to the countryside to get away from it.

I do not think that any modification will be able to make the plan sustainable for Blackmore.

My concerns relate specifically to the sustainability of Blackmore's inclusion in the Local Plan. My points relating to Blackmore are shown on the attached type sheet below. 1. GP services are already badly stretched. It take three to four weeks to get a non-emergency appointment. A higher population will strain this service to breaking point. 2. Blackmore is already prone to flooding. Building on greenfield / Green Belt land can only worsen this situation by reducing the available drainage areas. 3. The only parking available in the village, other than by the village hall, which is a long walk from local facilities, is along the narrow roads. These are already becoming full of parked vehicles. 4. As a small village, many of Blackmore's roads, in particular in the Redrose Lane area, are not much more than narrow lanes with no footpaths. The roads cannot support additional traffic resulting from increased housing, let alone construction traffic. 5. Transport links from the village to town are poor, with the bus service permanently under threat. This forces people into their cars already, without adding to the burden. Blackmore is too far away and cut off from the town centre and railway stations to be of benefit to new residents wishing to work in town or commute elsewhere. 6. There is no proven need for more housing this far away from the town. 7. The proposed development is on Green Belt land when there are Brown Belt area more usefully located closer to Brentwood and Shenfield. 8. The proposal does not take into account the increased housing from areas of private development within Blackmore. 9. Blackmore is small village of historical importance and character. Further development, will damage it irreversibly.

Sites R25 and R26 should be removed from the LDO. In accordance with 'local needs' some smaller homes could be allowed which would give existing residents the choice to "downsize", redeeming their (?) home.

Development of the proposed site has not been proven to be what is required in the village. Development by neighbouring authorities (e.g. Epping DC) have not been considered. Brownfield sites within BBC's authority have not been considered over Green field sites. Adjacent authorities have not been consulted. A 30 odd house development is already being built and other proposed sites e.g. Woollard Lane are "permission pending". The proposed development of 90 plus houses is far too many for the existing infrastructure, particularly Red Rose Lane for traffic 'and often local roads, doctors surgery is barely able to cope with the existing numbers and new classrooms would be needed in the local primary school. As Princess Ann supported a few years ago, if every village was about to build 4-5 houses, then local needs could be met and absorbed. BBC has not proposed this in other villages within its authority.

1. Remove the site from the plan and look at alternative brown fill sites and building fills. 2. Ask and consult local residents about what is required in the local district. 3. Discuss with the local councillors who know their area.

1. Major concerns about flooding in village due to additional strain on the drainage / sewage systems. 2. Overload on already strained infrastructure i.e. schools, doctors surgery, parking facilities. 3. Additional traffic and parking problems on already overused country lanes which were not designed for heavy traffic. 4. Building on green belt is not acceptable when brown fill sites are available.

1. Remove the site from the plan and look at alternative brown fill sites and building fills. 2. Ask and consult local residents about what is required in the local district. 3. Discuss with the local councillors who know their area.

1. Major concerns about flooding in village due to additional strain on the drainage / sewage systems. 2. Overload on already strained infrastructure i.e. schools, doctors surgery, parking facilities. 3. Additional traffic and parking problems on already overused country lanes which were not designed for heavy traffic. 4. Building on green belt is not acceptable when brown fill sites are available.

There has been no adequate housing need survey. There has been no projected traffic survey to assess the impact of the proposed development. The needs to be greater consultation with those impacted by the development of the village and ensure that it does simply become a urban suburb of Brentwood.

There has been insufficient consultation with either the village or neighbouring councils to show clearly what impact these developments will have on the village and its environment. Blackmore is a small village and its resources, such as they are, are already overstretched and have little scope for expansion without severely impacting its village nature. Access to basic services is already limited within the existing population numbers - the school is full, medical facilities are already at capacity or indeed beyond existing demand. The choice of Red Rose Lane, a narrow country lane, as a site for major urban expansion is wholly inappropriate and could only operate safely with major expansion of it and the surrounding roads. The village, already a 'rat run' for commuting traffic, will be severely impacted by the additional traffic parking further pressure on the village centre where parking can be at best chaotic and presenting dangerous environment for children accessing the school. The transport links for commuters are currently inadequate and would inevitably increase the demand for use of private transport. Sewage and drainage issues already a problem in parts of the village will be further compounded by this development.

Site R25 and R26 should be removed from the LDP. Please refer to the BVHA Neighbourhood Plan which sets out local housing need.

I understand that there has been no housing needs survey to demonstrate why Blackmore is included in the LDP. There should be clear evidence that all brownfield sites in the Borough have been fully utilised in an development plan. There is insufficient local infrastructure to cope with the planned housing expansion.

Sites R25 and R26 should be removed from the LDP. Please refer to the BVHA Neighbourhood Plan which sets out local housing need

I consider the Local Plan in relation to development at Blackmore is unsound for the following principal reasons: - 1. Brownfield sites in the Borough as a whole should be developed before ever considering green field and green belt sites. 2. I understand there has been no "housing needs survey" to demonstrate that Blackmore should be in the LDP. 3. The infrastructure in and around the village is already exhausted. Blackmore cannot take more housing without extensive changes to the infrastructure.

There does appear to be any clear coherent idea for the villages including Blackmore. No cohesion with neighbouring authorities. Other private developments, i.e. Fingrith Hall Lane and Red Rose Lane etc don't appear to have been taken into consideration. Blackmore has only modest facilities and would struggle to accommodate these developments. Locally traffic seems to be mushroomed. Parking in the village centre is difficult. I think there are other allocated sites which could accommodate these developments more easily.

The infrastructure of the village is no capable of with standing the amount of housing being proposed.

I really can't see what modifications could be considered in view of the infrastructure of the village. In view of my previous comments - the potential flooding - the narrow lanes - the parking - schools, doctors at full capacity.

See attached

scrap it

See attached.

Consider the local needs as outlined by the BVHA plan.

See attached

Site R25 and R26 to be removed from the LDP and Planners to refer to the BVHA neighbourhood plan which details the local housing needs, etc.

See attached

Sites R25 and R26 be removed from the LDP Plan. You need to refer to he Blackmore Village Heritage Association for our Local Housing Needs for our sustainable community. We do not want unwanted and unjustified large scale development. There has been no 'Housing Needs Survey' to demonstrate why Blackmore is included in the LDP. Was is not the Brentwood Borough Council who said "we will continue to protect our key assets including the environment, heritage and character of the borough".

See attached

Site R25 and R26 should be removed from the LDP and planners should refer to the BVHA neighbourhood Plan which clearly sets out the local housing needs, for our already sustainable community.

See attached.

Site R25 and R26 to be removed. BVHA neighbourhood Plan sets out the local housing needs, that are sustainable.

See attached.