3.17
Object
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 45
Received: 14/08/2013
Respondent: Mrs Jill Hubbard
I wish to object in the strongest possible terms to this proposed development (101A):
-This is green-belt land and just because it was used for M25 widening does not mean you can develop it as a Business Park.
- To suggest that the 12 hectares of warehousing & offices would be "an attractive gateway to the borough" (3.17) is utterly preposterous; especially given that this is nowhere near the town.
- The proposed development would actually destroy a beautiful semi-rural area that provides an appropriate and lovely access to the borough.
I wish to object in the strongest possible terms to this proposed development (101A) This is green-belt land and just because it was used for M25 widening does not mean you can develop it as a Business Park. We have enough of them standing empty in Brentwood at the moment. To suggest that t 12 hectares of warehousing & offices would be "an attractive gateway to the borough" (3.17) is utterly preposterous; especially given that this is nowhere near the town. The proposed development would actually destroy a beautiful semi-rural area that provides an appropriate and lovely access to the borough.
It seems to me that this proposal only serves to line the pocket of the current landowner without giving a thought to the detrimental effect on the area.
Green-belt and has been stealthily developed with no planning permission at Codham Hall Farm for many years now and it is an absolute disgrace that our Council has not and does not enforce planning regulations at this site.
The planning regulations were put in place to protect all of the residents in the Borough and its environment from inappropriate development. it's about time they were enforced at this site.
Comment
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 3375
Received: 02/10/2013
Respondent: S & J Padfield and Partners
Agent: Strutt & Parker LLP
Do not consider that the policy should make reference to a maximum of 12 ha of B8 use. The justification for the current policy wording is set out in paragraph 3.17 of the Preferred Options document and makes reference to the 12.1ha B8 demand identified in the Heart of Essex Economic Futures Study. Consider the policy wording should also allow for additional uses such as the proposed hotel shown within the indicative vision statement, and should additionally allow for appropriate supporting land uses and amenity provision.
See attached regarding land at Codham Hall Farm south of A127 (site 101A, former M25 works site)