Question 2
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3419
Received: 07/01/2015
Respondent: Michael Moore
I support these views but the West Horndon option looks better
I support these views but the West Horndon option looks better
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3434
Received: 11/01/2015
Respondent: Mr. Michael R. M. Newman
The issues raised and comments presented make sense to me in addressing the Local Plan.
The issues raised and comments presented make sense to me in addressing the Local Plan.
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3436
Received: 13/01/2015
Respondent: Mr Barry Norfolk
Agent: Mrs Sue Bell BSc MRTPI
It is considered that there is greater potential for the use of the land around the villages in the north of the Bororugh that will sustain the current level of services
It is considered that there is greater potential for the use of the land around the villages in the north of the Bororugh that will sustain the current level of services
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3452
Received: 17/01/2015
Respondent: Mr Andrew Gibbons
I agree with the A127 corridor being the most suitable response
I agree with the A127 corridor being the most suitable response
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3458
Received: 20/01/2015
Respondent: Ben Winter
I agree
I agree
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3488
Received: 25/01/2015
Respondent: Mrs Ann Cardus
There seems to be little mention of the opportunity to improve the public transport and cycling networks in all three areas but particularly public transport for the area north of Brentwood where the public service provision is inadequate
There seems to be little mention of the opportunity to improve the public transport and cycling networks in all three areas but particularly public transport for the area north of Brentwood where the public service provision is inadequate
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3514
Received: 31/01/2015
Respondent: Mr P Jones
All three areas should be considered along with the potential to improve their transport links. Improved transport links fundamentally change the development opprtunities.
All three areas should be considered along with the potential to improve their transport links. Improved transport links fundamentally change the development opprtunities.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3536
Received: 03/02/2015
Respondent: Miss Shelley Field
No
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3550
Received: 03/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs Ann Field
No
see attached
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3563
Received: 03/02/2015
Respondent: Robin Penny
No. Broadly OK. Transport is key, but shouldn't prevent dispersed development where obvious sites exist.
2.17 is an important point regarding access to Brentwood is there any way to add an exit from Brentwood to A12? Also something has to be done to improve traffic flow from A12 to M25 Southbound avoiding Brook St roundabout. This will also help relieve Brentwood.
see attached
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3599
Received: 04/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs Christie Ward
No comments made
See attached document
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3612
Received: 04/02/2015
Respondent: - EW Hall
No comment made
See attached document
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3646
Received: 04/02/2015
Respondent: Diane McCarthy
I agree with the issues raised apart from those North of the Borough where I feel that there should be more consideration in how to encourage growth and transport links.
I agree with the issues raised apart from those North of the Borough where I feel that there should be more consideration in how to encourage growth and transport links.
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3660
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Ms Patricia Taylor
A) North of the Borough - comment 2.14 agree
B) Broadly agree
C) Broadly agree
Please see attached document
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3661
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Ms Patricia Taylor
A) North of the Borough - Comment 2.15 - Do not agree
Please see attached document
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3664
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Chris Hossack
We should avoid blending distinct areas of Brentwood i.e. Pilgrims Hatch into Doddinghurst, Hutton into Mountnessing etc.
The north of the Borough is particularly sensitive and has some very nice villages. However I can see the logic to development along the A127 corridor as this is a key trunk road and has the benefit of the C2C mainline station, north of the borough does not have this benefit.
I am opposed to the inclusion of two areas in the consultation and would not wish to see them developed. I refer to area in the A12 Corridor section:
1) Land to the North of Pilgrims Hatch to Doddinghurst i.e. North of Hatch rd. There is a clear separation of green belt between the Hatch and Doddinghurst which must be maintained.
2) Land to the South and East of Hutton Village i.e. Creaseys Farm and to the North of Rayleigh Road, again these are key green belt separation areas that give Hutton it's distinction. To the South in particular it is an area of natural beauty and a protected conservation area with some historic buildings such as All Saints church.
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3672
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Chris Hossack
I largely agree with the issues raised. However the key issue in the A12 corridor development area is the congestion that is caused by an inadequate by pass and it's inadequate junction with the M25 at Brook Street..
Increased Town Centre residential development will exaggerate the congestion from Ongar rd heading south to the High St which is gridlocked in the morning already.
I largely agree with the issues raised. However the key issue in the A12 corridor development area is the congestion that is caused by an inadequate by pass and it's inadequate junction with the M25 at Brook Street..
Increased Town Centre residential development will exaggerate the congestion from Ongar rd heading south to the High St which is gridlocked in the morning already.
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3681
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Austin
Number of people: 2
Atkins Ltd consulting engineers are from Birmingham and are not concerned with local people and the problems we have in Brentwood at the moment. We would have thought that a Brentwood residing consulting engineer would be far more sympathetic to the problems some of these sites will cause to the immediate area and the local residents. That's without the added traffic and parking problems these will no doubt cause.
See attached document
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3694
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Mr and Mrs Lighterness
Number of people: 2
No comment made
See attached consultation questionnaire.
Please refer to the attached letters relating to the proposals for development in the above mentioned area.
It is widely felt that any building developments on these existing Green spaces (regardless of actual planning definition) would have an adverse effect on all local residents, from the young to those retired.
The area is the first 'parcel' of countryside North of Brentwood and as such is the Gateway for all residents who wish to enjoy access to the paths and Bridleways that stretch out from this point.
The access to that 'Gateway' is currently along quiet, almost traffic free, lanes and is a safe passage for both young and old.
It is vital that the local community and Brentwood as a whole do not lose such a valuable and recreational asset.
Any development upon the sites, in the area, would involve road building and re-planning of the local highway, putting even greater pressure upon the already dangerous, Ongar Road/Coxtie Green road roundabout. It is probable that any such development will further endanger pedestrian access to the previously mentioned 'Gateway'.
No development should take place.
Hullets Lane/ Gents Farm and Environs, Pilgrims Hatch
Site Ref: 176
This parcel of land referenced above, is the closest to the 'Gateway' reference point mentioned in the covering letter, any development here would destroy that change affect one experiences when leaving suburbia and entering the real countryside.
The land itself has a natural spring and most of the time is waterlogged. Great Crested Newts have been seen in its pool, bats frequent the area and other wildlife, badgers, squirrels, etc 'live' in the vicinity.
Access is a problem to this site, as mentioned in the covering letter.
The land is adjacent to the Grade II Listed Gents Farm and its cartilage buildings.
Area must remain Green Belt.
Hullets Lane/ Gents Farm and Environs, Pilgrims Hatch
Site Ref: 011C
SHLAA ref: G038
This parcel of land, reference above, was stated as Green Belt in an unsuccessful development application made in 2009/10. There has been no stated change in that status and the previous reasons for the rejection of the plan remain in place.
The land is habitat for bats, smaller species of deer and other wildlife, badgers, squirrels, and untold varieties of bird species including long tailed tits.
Access is a problem to this site, as mentioned in the covering letter.
Again the land is adjacent to the Grade II Listed Gents Farm and its curtilage buildings.
Area must remain Green Belt.
Hullets Lane/ Gents Farm and Environs, Pilgrims Hatch
Site Ref: 011B
SHLAA Ref: G038
This land is scrub land but is habitat for bats, badgers, squirrels and untold varieties of bird species including long tailed tits, protected species such as Great Crested newts are known to be in this area.
Access is a problem to this site, as mentioned in the covering letter. It is probable that this area would be sacrificed to any road improvements to support the other building plans. The land currently acts a natural sound barrier against traffic noise on the Ongar Road, especially the braking sounds emanating from the Coxtie Green / Ongar Road roundabout.
Again the land is adjacent to the Grade II Listed Gents Farm and its curtilage buildings.
Area must remain Green Belt.
Hullets Lane/ Gents Farm and Environs, Pilgrims Hatch
Site Ref: 011A
SHLAA ref: B025
In October 2013, many of the local residents objected to the proposed building of domestic property on the above site, nothing has changed in the interim concerning those objections.
We, like many locally are once again stating that this building proposal should not be considered.
Hullets/ Gents Farm area is Grade II Listed, together with its curtilage buildings which border the rear gardens of 10 to 20 Orchard Lane. The buildings cannot be demolished to gain access to the paddock, which is Green and not Brown belt land, as it would defile the meaning of the Listing.
Area must remain Green Belt.
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3711
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs Margaret Ede
No comment made
See attached document
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3728
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Charter Homes
Agent: EJW Planning Ltd
In particular agree that development opportunities within the greenbelt surrounding the urban areas should be considered for future housing growth.
See attached document
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3742
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Richard Smith
I do not agree that there are building opportunities in the A12 corridor. I do agree with the unfeasibility of the North of the Borough option and I do agree with the suitability of the A127 corridor.
See attached document
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3755
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Gordon MacLellan
Generally true but some villages need to grow a bit all over the borough to protect local shops, post offices and pubs. Congregations in churches are often falling so a few more homes makes sense if build sensitively.
Generally true but some villages need to grow a bit all over the borough to protect local shops, post offices and pubs. Congregations in churches are often falling so a few more homes makes sense if build sensitively.
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3767
Received: 05/02/2015
Respondent: mr frank thomas
In the North "villages" area the report states ... "It is important to consider allowing villages to grow in order to provide for local need". Genuine local need is actually small. The vast majority of "newcomers" to this area are from outside the villages, and a significant number from outside the Brentwood area. Most of the last development (Outings Lane) appears to have been filled by people with no connection to Doddinghurst. This would be the same for any major new housing. The villages would be sacrificing their rural environment for no gain.
In the North "villages" area the report states ... "It is important to consider allowing villages to grow in order to provide for local need". Genuine local need is actually small. The vast majority of "newcomers" to this area are from outside the villages, and a significant number from outside the Brentwood area. Most of the last development (Outings Lane) appears to have been filled by people with no connection to Doddinghurst. This would be the same for any major new housing. The villages would be sacrificing their rural environment for no gain.
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3772
Received: 07/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Neil Osborne
Yes I agree with the issues, but is Q1 there are many other issues that have not been raised for these areas,
Yes I agree with the issues, but is Q1 there are many other issues that have not been raised for these areas,
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3793
Received: 07/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs Jean Laut
For all 3 areas my opinion we should ONLY include Brownfield sites in the development options.
Developers obviously prefer green belt and/or agricultural land as the don't have the preparation costs that might occure with Brownfield.
Greenbelt/Agricultural land should only be made available when there is no Brownfield left to be used - note I do not support the words "suitable brownfield" as that gives the developers a get out route.
Brownfield only please.
For all 3 areas my opinion we should ONLY include Brownfield sites in the development options.
Developers obviously prefer green belt and/or agricultural land as the don't have the preparation costs that might occure with Brownfield.
Greenbelt/Agricultural land should only be made available when there is no Brownfield left to be used - note I do not support the words "suitable brownfield" as that gives the developers a get out route.
Brownfield only please.
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3807
Received: 08/02/2015
Respondent: Maureen Donnelly
I support this as I think the A127 is easier to develop around as there is so much space and less general disruption would be caused. More jobs will be created where they are needed.
I support this as I think the A127 is easier to develop around as there is so much space and less general disruption would be caused. More jobs will be created where they are needed.
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3810
Received: 08/02/2015
Respondent: Maureen Donnelly
This is a good idea - the transport links via the main road is already there - it would be the cheapest option as less road building would be needed.
This is a good idea - the transport links via the main road is already there - it would be the cheapest option as less road building would be needed.
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3811
Received: 08/02/2015
Respondent: Maureen Donnelly
I think that the centre of Brentwood/Shenfield is too congested to take more homes.
I think that the centre of Brentwood/Shenfield is too congested to take more homes.
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 3813
Received: 08/02/2015
Respondent: Maureen Donnelly
I agree with the above - West Horndon is best placed for growth and will be cheapest to implement larger growth.
I agree with the above - West Horndon is best placed for growth and will be cheapest to implement larger growth.