Object

Representation ID: 29984

Received: 27/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Ruth Dimond

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

NPPF (para 11) disapplied where there are clear policies to reject development Green Belt. R25 and R26 also fall under areas at risk of flooding.
Exceptional circumstances test to develop Green Belt land has not been adequately demonstrated.
Blackmore is remote with no main roads, narrow lanes, poor bus service and no train station.
R25 and R26 are high quality Green Belt land with high biodiversity. Release of Green Belt for development should not be permitted where brownfield land or poor quality Green Belt land is available.

Object

Representation ID: 29991

Received: 27/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Gillean Driver

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

No evidence that exceptional circumstances test was ever carried out by BBC as it does not meet their strategic aims.

Object

Representation ID: 30015

Received: 27/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Tony Chaplin

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

BBC did not carry out our exceptional circumstances test, otherwise they would have identified available brownfield sites, 12 houses have already been built in Red Rose Lane, Blackmore this year. With the additional 70 houses proposed. The 3 sites in Red Rose Lane will result in a 23% increase in dwellings, which is ridiculous.

Object

Representation ID: 30020

Received: 27/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Cartwright

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

BBC did not carry our exceptional circumstances test, otherwise they would have identified available brownfield sites, 12 houses were built on such a site in 2020/21 in Red Rose Lane, Blackmore. With the additional 70 houses proposed. The 3 sites in Red Rose Lane will result in a 23% increase in dwellings, village cannot absorb such an increase and retain its original character.

Object

Representation ID: 30025

Received: 27/11/2021

Respondent: Mr David Cartwright

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

BBC did not carry out exceptional circumstances test, other they would have identified available brownfield sites, 12 houses were built on such a site in 2020/21 in Red Rose Lane, Blackmore. With the additional 70 houses proposed. The 3 sites in Red Rose Lane will result in a 23% increase in dwellings, no village can absorb such an increase and retain its original character.

Object

Representation ID: 30034

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Kenneth Herring

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Blackmore Village is a remote village, the doctors and schools are at capacity, there is no railway station, poor bus service, very few shops, infrastructure cannot sustain additional population and traffic. Flooding will eventually happen and will get worse if the landscape is interfered with. Wildlife will be impacted. Residents' concerns have not been taken into account and have been ignored.

Object

Representation ID: 30042

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Keith Creffield

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Do not believe the exceptional circumstances test was carried out with any conviction. If it had been the brownfield sites in Red Rose Lane, Blackmore and at Stondon Massey would have been identified and included in LDP.

Object

Representation ID: 30058

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Patricia Chaplin

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

BBC did not carry out exceptional circumstances test, otherwise they would have identified available brownfield sites, 12 houses have already been built in Red Rose Lane, Blackmore this year. With the additional 70 houses proposed. The 3 sites in Red Rose Lane will result in a 23% increase in dwellings, which is ridiculous.

Object

Representation ID: 30061

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jacqueline Butler

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Blackmore has no main roads, all roads out are country lanes, has a very limited bus service and you need a car to get to a train station. Does not equate to it being an exceptional circumstance. There is Green Belt land in other areas much better suited with infrastructure already in place.

Object

Representation ID: 30071

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Toni Allen

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

The exceptional circumstances test could not have been carried out with any accuracy or conviction. The brownfield sites in Red Rose Lane, Blackmore would have identified. So I therefore believe it was not conducted correctly or at all. It was not included in the LDP.

Object

Representation ID: 30079

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Anne Adkins

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

The inclusion of sites R25 and R26 into LDP was unconsidered and not justified as there are no exceptional reasons. In addition of provision of residential development and does not meet Government guidelines of the release of greenfield land for development.

Object

Representation ID: 30089

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Mark Allen

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Not sure if anyone believes that BBC did exceptional circumstances test for Blackmore as it was obvious there were alternate sites which were brownfield.

Object

Representation ID: 30099

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Ms Pam Blackmore

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

I don't believe that the investigation into the release of Green Belt was undertaken properly. It requires exceptional circumstances which for sites R25 and R26 actually suggest they should not be using Green Belt. By not investigating the sites before creating the plan, brownfield sites were ignored and they should have been used in advance of Green Belt.

Object

Representation ID: 30102

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Colin Budd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

There appears to be a refusal to investigate brownfield sites in Red Rose Lane and Stondon Massey by the BBC but the BBC are happy to concrete cover Green Belt land making this plan unsound and not legally compliant. Not only do the Inspectors wish to bulldoze over Green Belt but also local residents without any consideration to the areas environment i.e. wildlife, pollution and the very real threat of flooding to Blackmore and properties.

Object

Representation ID: 30107

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Ella Bradley

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

The release of two Green Belt land sites i.e. R25 and R26 is not justified for housing development.

Object

Representation ID: 30116

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Butler

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Blackmore does not line up with being an exceptional circumstance. Mainly the problems with connectivity. There are no main roads, all roads in and around the village are country lanes and there is only a very limited bus service, train stations are only accessible by car. No strategic approach has been applied this area is totally unsuitable for house expansion without major infrastructure improvements, there must be better suited Green Belt land with infrastructure and transport that can cope with this type of expansion.

Object

Representation ID: 30122

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Pamela Bailey

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Release of greenfield site R25 and R26 is not justified, as exceptional needs cannot be evidenced. The proposed housing development (now 70) has not been based on local needs and also fails Brentwood Councils own strategic objections as it is driven purely by meeting housing number for borough.

Object

Representation ID: 30136

Received: 29/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Bowland

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Do not believe the exceptional circumstances test was carried out with any conviction. If it had been the brownfield sites in Red Rose Lane, Blackmore and at Stondon Massey would have been identified and included in LDP.

Object

Representation ID: 30147

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Fisher

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

I do not believe the exceptional circumstances test was carried out adequately enough. If so, the locations available in Redrose Lane (now Sandford Paddocks) would have been identified along with those in Stondon Massey all put in the LDP.

Object

Representation ID: 30173

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Fleur Morgan

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

I believe there are brownfield sites that are better suited. The exceptional circumstances test was carried out with no conviction.

Object

Representation ID: 30179

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Stephen Murrell

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

However, there are many reasons why they are totally unsuitable. Including the remoteness of the sites access only by narrow rural roads, over congestion within the village by additional traffic. Limited public transport. No employment opportunities. Overstretched small school, doctors surgery a small local shop. Channeling traffic through Orchard Piece is totally unacceptable as it is already congested with parked vehicles. A large development as proposed (relative to the size of Blackmore) with over burden the infrastructure sewerage system already inadequate and increase the risk of more flooding within the village by building on a flood plain currently providing some protection.

Object

Representation ID: 30183

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Susan Miers

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

We are sure that the exceptional circumstances test was erroneous. As the brownfield sites in Red Rose Lane Blackmore and at Stondon Massey would have been identified and included in the LDP.

Object

Representation ID: 30189

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Colin Miers

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

We are sure that the exceptional circumstances test was erroneous. As the brownfield sites in Red Rose Lane Blackmore and at Stondon Massey would have been identified and included in the LDP.

Object

Representation ID: 30193

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Lorrain Murrell

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

No exceptional circumstances to support the removal and development of the two greenfield sites R25 and R26. It is purely a development opportunity lead by property developers and therefore unsound. As per Government guidelines for the justification of removing land from Green Belt.

Object

Representation ID: 30199

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Andrew Moulton

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

I don't believe the exceptional circumstances test was carried out with any conviction. If it has been the brownfield sites in Red Rose Lane Blackmore and at Stondon Massey would have been identified and included in the LDP.

Object

Representation ID: 30205

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mr David Janes

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Do not believe the exceptional circumstances test was carried out with any conviction. If it had been the brownfield sites in Red Rose Lane, Blackmore and at Stondon Massey would have been identified and included in LDP.

Object

Representation ID: 30210

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Keith Lodge

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Little thought has been given to the exceptional circumstances test and was carried out with no conviction.

Object

Representation ID: 30218

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mrs Jane Lodge

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

We think test not carried out properly without much thought.

Object

Representation ID: 30241

Received: 01/12/2021

Respondent: Mr Marc Cohen

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

In my opinion, the exceptional circumstances test was not carried out with any meaningful thought or conviction. There are two brownfield sites in Stondon Massey and Red Rose Lane (Blackmore) that would have been included in the LDP.

Object

Representation ID: 30252

Received: 30/11/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Reed

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

What exceptional circumstances are there? There are none to defend the proposal to remove green belt. How can you defend your guidelines to not repeat comments made previously. Seems to illegally impede our defence, especially as you never answered / failed to defend your actions previously.