Whilst some of the smaller areas indicated may be able to take a low level of development without negatively impacting the surrounding areas too much, this is clearly not the case for the larger areas shown (surrounding Ingrave and Herongate).

The villages of Herongate & Ingrave have questionable transport links at present with the only real transport option being road. This is disrupted on a frequent basis due to the A128 being blocked by frequent accidents and issues on the A127, A12 and M25 also increase the traffic flow on a regular basis. Large development in this area would create further misery to residents who would be battling to get to work and to get their children to secondary education on a daily basis.

To reiterate further comments - the sites surrounding Ingrave / Herongate would be unsuitable for large-scale development due to the lack of services (particularly transport infrastructure that is available / creatable).

The plans for Herongate and Ingrave will devastate these historical settlements unnecessarily. The is already too much pressure on the A roads as they connect the A12, A127 and M25 and if any of those roads are blocked (as they often are) the congestion blocks Brentwood as is.

see attached

I am not convinced the current infrastructure of transport could cope with much more in the corridor area. The roads are already congested for commuters.

The travellers who came to Herongate in 2013 and 2012 caused a lot of mess and menace in the area and as a home owner near by I was unhappy that this was caused, Rubbish was left and my partner was heckled whilst running past the site and felt unsafe in an area we had paid a premium to feel safe. Consequently I would not want this to be a permanent place for travellers and I would strongly object

Mountnessing Parish Council (MPC) would like to make the following comments for consideration by Brentwood Borough Council:

MPC prefers to consider and comment on actual planning applications when they are made. It believes that it would not be appropriate to nominate development sites and opportunities in the parish as it could well be imposing decisions on future members of MPC during the lifetime of the LDP. In this way it is felt that no advance recommendation or commitment will be made for any development so that careful consideration can be made at the appropriate time so as to weigh the needs and requirements prevailing at the point in time.

MPC recognises the importance of the Parish in respect of the A12 corridor and the limited opportunities for key developments that can make use of the village facilities, bus routes and transport links (including Cross Rail) within the village envelope. Whilst coalescence is an issue for consideration the A12 creates an obvious division between Mountnessing and Ingatestone that prevents them from ever being linked. With this in mind the challenge of coalescence for MPC is seen as the development of the green corridor that separates the urban area of Shenfield from the semi rural areas that surround it. Even though the A12 would still create a break it is felt that developing Officers Meadows would bring Mountnessing into a continuum of building with very little separation from the urban area.

MPC does have concerns about one specific site. This relates to the possibility of Ingatestone Garden Centre becoming a residential development. This would add a dense area of dwellings to what is seen more as outer areas of Ingatestone. Such a development would not be close schools, public transport or medical facilities and should not therefore be considered suitable for housing.

MPC would like to ensure that building density, building styles and street scene are considerations that are given a high level of importance in any potential development. MPC will always want to preserve the 'village feel' of Mountnessing and will always strive to make the right recommendations to ensure that we keep the village how residents would like it to be.

The Parish Council request that the following proposals be given serious consideration by the Borough Council:

- Addressing the need for one bedroom social dwellings to allow existing, and mainly, elderly residents to downsize.
-The use of shared ownership/first time buyer initiatives to help young people to get on to the housing ladder.
- Providing for an increase in the number of bungalows which are in demand by the population in general and also by the projected rise in the number of elderly residents.

MPC has very serious concerns over developments proceeding with little regard to the impacts they will have on the existing infrastructure. MPC would want to see that the fresh water supply can provide sufficient pressure to all properties and also that sewerage can be properly drained and processed even in times of high demand such as heavy rainfall. Additionally the Education Authority should ensure that there are sufficient school places for all children that move into the area and that there are additional healthcare facilities provided to cover all residents.

The Parish Council would like to give consideration to the desirability of reclassifying the parish boundary within the Brentwood Local Development Plan. The present boundary does not accurately represent the village's entrance and egress and the Parish Council will arrange to discuss the issues involved with the Borough's Planning Team.

I think that it is vital that existing open spaces and woodland, such as Officer's Meadow, are preserved. This is particularly applicable to green sites close to town centres, which are a major factor in making Brentwood such a pleasant place to live.

Only brownfield sites should be released, and attention should be paid to road design to mitigate the effect of increased congestion. It is vital that public transport be made available and affordable for any substantial development.

Mountnessing Parish Council (MPC) would like to make the following comments for consideration by Brentwood Borough Council:

MPC prefers to consider and comment on actual planning applications when they are made. It believes that it would not be appropriate to nominate development sites and opportunities in the parish as it could well be imposing decisions on future members of MPC during the lifetime of the LDP. In this way it is felt that no advance recommendation or commitment will be made for any development so that careful consideration can be made at the appropriate time so as to weigh the needs and requirements prevailing at the point in time.

MPC recognises the importance of the Parish in respect of the A12 corridor and the limited opportunities for key developments that can make use of the village facilities, bus routes and transport links (including Cross Rail) within the village envelope. Whilst coalescence is an issue for consideration the A12 creates an obvious division between Mountnessing and Ingatestone that prevents them from ever being linked. With this in mind the challenge of coalescence for MPC is seen as the development of the green corridor that separates the urban area of Shenfield from the semi rural areas that surround it. Even though the A12 would still create a break it is felt that developing Officers Meadows would bring Mountnessing into a continuum of building with very little separation from the urban area.

MPC does have concerns about one specific site. This relates to the possibility of Ingatestone Garden Centre becoming a residential development. This would add a dense area of dwellings to what is seen more as outer areas of Ingatestone. Such a development would not be close schools, public transport or medical facilities and should not therefore be considered suitable for housing.

MPC would like to ensure that building density, building styles and street scene are considerations that are given a high level of importance in any potential development. MPC will always want to preserve the 'village feel' of Mountnessing and will always strive to make the right recommendations to ensure that we keep the village how residents would like it to be.

The Parish Council request that the following proposals be given serious consideration by the Borough Council:

- Addressing the need for one bedroom social dwellings to allow existing, and mainly, elderly residents to downsize.
-The use of shared ownership/first time buyer initiatives to help young people to get on to the housing ladder.
- Providing for an increase in the number of bungalows which are in demand by the population in general and also by the projected rise in the number of elderly residents.

MPC has very serious concerns over developments proceeding with little regard to the impacts they will have on the existing infrastructure. MPC would want to see that the fresh water supply can provide sufficient pressure to all properties and also that sewerage can be properly drained and processed even in times of high demand such as heavy rainfall. Additionally the Education Authority should ensure that there are sufficient school places for all children that move into the area and that there are additional healthcare facilities provided to cover all residents.

The Parish Council would like to give consideration to the desirability of reclassifying the parish boundary within the Brentwood Local Development Plan. The present boundary does not accurately represent the village's entrance and egress and the Parish Council will arrange to discuss the issues involved with the Borough's Planning Team.

I totally object the vast area of land between Hutton, Ingrave beyond (028C and 192). This is a unique and beautiful area of countryside including ancient woodlands, beautiful views, bluebell woods, footpaths, bridle paths. It is used by walkers, Ramblers, horse riders, cyclists and families. I object to any inclusion of this area in the local plan and any development in it and on its borders.Once sacrificed we will never be able to get this beautiful area back. This countryside currently easily accessible to all the population of Hutton and Ingrave with out need to drive there.

Greenbelt land should be protected, but the A12 corridor, around the Brentwood, Shenfield, Mountnessing area, etc, has the greatest demand for growth, and the greatest capacity to deal with it. It has schools, road and rail systems already in place, as well as brownfield sites that could be adapted for development.

There are a considerable number of priority ancient woodland and deciduous woodland Local Wildlife Sites scattered throughout this large area to the east of the A12 corridor. It is therefore of the utmost importance that any sites allocated for development are selected on the basis that there will be no adverse impacts on these existing designated wildlife sites; impacts would include increased recreational pressure, pet predation and severance of important wildlife corridors.

We would urge local authority planners to create "green infrastructure" masterplans which aim to enhance linkages between and habitat "buffers" around these existing local wildlife sites. Such masterplans should be developed in advance of any plans for the built development and their primary focus should be on protecting and enhancing biodiversity. Any substantial development allocated in this area should include the generous provision of recreational green space. This would serve to reduce human pressure on existing wildlife habitat.

I wish to object to the release of land for housing along Roman Road where the garden center is and the vacant land adjoining it.
There is an increasing problem with parking along that section of Roman Road mainly due to insufficient parking for the houses in Harebridge Crescent. Over the last month I have had several cars parked illegally outside the front of my house within the dropped curb of my driveway, obstructing the public footpath and my vision.
Added to this although the speed limit is 40, the majority of the traffic speeds up to 60 when they get part of the way down Roman Road. Because the visibility is often so bad I am halfway across the road with cars speeding towards me in the centre of the road. This situation will only get worse if more houses are built, making Roman Road unsafe to drive in or for the children to cross to get to school.

Support, provided priority is given to brown field sites and there is no loss of identity of Margaretting, Ingatestone, Mountnessing, Shenfield. They must not be allowed to creep into one another.

(By the way, the housing land on the map is to the east of Brentwood, Ingrave and Herongate!)

I feel there would be greater impact on over development of brown field sites rather than sympathetically building on green belt sites.

One caveat to my statement is that we need to carefully consider the TYPE of housing we should be building. It is wrong to assume that the only housing need is for people wanting their first property or downsizing, ergo only build flats. People need family houses and these need to be built. Building 4 flats instead of 2 houses may make the numbers look better, but it's not what Brentwood and surrounding areas need.

FINAL DRAFT
Herongate and Ingrave Parish Council
Response to Consultation on Brentwood Strategic Growth Options

Assumptions:

1. The six thousand plus building requirement from the Government is fixed.
2. This implies a 20 - 25% growth in Brentwood's population from incomers alone by 2030.
3. The only way that there is any possibility of this huge rate of growth being sustainable is to make an equally huge investment in infrastructure.

It is obvious that piecemeal developments will not make possible any significant income from "106" or similar type commitments making large developments obligatory. Necessary infrastructure improvements would be impossible.

It is equally clear that good quality, productive, agricultural land should be avoided when selecting locations for enormous developments of the type required. If the UK is to grow at this rate, feeding the resident population will become difficult, particularly in a world that is becoming increasingly unstable.

To apply the above to the situation in Herongate and Ingrave; all of the farm land to the east of the A128 (Brentwood Road) as far as Hutton and Billericay is in current productive use and should be left to help feed the country. Additionally, this agricultural land, particularly if, as seems likely, Brentwood Borough is absorbed into London, will be a part of the greenbelt separating our Borough from Billericay and Wickford. The vast majority of this land has very poor access roads which again would make it very unsuitable for large developments.

Of the remaining option sites in the two villages, all are small. The majority have accessibility problems. However, two sites, one opposite Button Common and the other next to the Ingrave Johnston School, are potentially accessible directly from the Brentwood Road. Were these sites removed from the greenbelt by the LDP process, many reasons would remain for not using either of them.

The Brentwood Road (A128) is heavily loaded and has a bottleneck through Herongate and Ingrave. Gridlock is regularly caused by the various junctions through the villages; Billericay Road and the Petrol Station are good examples. Vetoing any new junctions on the A128 would be an excellent way of not making matters worse. In the event that, as mooted, major developments occur in West Horndon and/or Dunton Garden Suburb then the idea of having additional junctions in the bottleneck becomes ludicrous.

These two sites have another common factor; both form a part of the Thames Chase Woodlands. The designations were formally established between the Borough and the Thames Chase organisation. A commitment was made by the Brentwood Borough Council to act for Thames Chase in protecting the sites from harm as special landscape areas and as wildlife habitats. Both areas are proven to support prolific quantities of wildlife. The site opposite Button Common is a County Wildlife site and the other has recently been subjected to detailed ecological studies for mammals, reptiles, amphibians and bats providing proof of the prolific presence of many species in each category. We assume that Brentwood Borough would not even consider reneging on such a formal commitment to Thames Chase. Further, the site opposite Button Common is sandwiched between two conservation areas which would be very badly degraded by building a number of blocks of flats there. Similarly, the site between Hillcrest Nursery and Ingrave Johnston School is the last remaining greenbelt area preventing the conjoining of Ingrave and Herongate. These are two separate villages and residents very much wish them to remain so.

FINAL DRAFT
Herongate and Ingrave Parish Council
Response to Consultation on Brentwood Strategic Growth Options

Assumptions:

1. The six thousand plus building requirement from the Government is fixed.
2. This implies a 20 - 25% growth in Brentwood's population from incomers alone by 2030.
3. The only way that there is any possibility of this huge rate of growth being sustainable is to make an equally huge investment in infrastructure.

It is obvious that piecemeal developments will not make possible any significant income from "106" or similar type commitments making large developments obligatory. Necessary infrastructure improvements would be impossible.

It is equally clear that good quality, productive, agricultural land should be avoided when selecting locations for enormous developments of the type required. If the UK is to grow at this rate, feeding the resident population will become difficult, particularly in a world that is becoming increasingly unstable.

To apply the above to the situation in Herongate and Ingrave; all of the farm land to the east of the A128 (Brentwood Road) as far as Hutton and Billericay is in current productive use and should be left to help feed the country. Additionally, this agricultural land, particularly if, as seems likely, Brentwood Borough is absorbed into London, will be a part of the greenbelt separating our Borough from Billericay and Wickford. The vast majority of this land has very poor access roads which again would make it very unsuitable for large developments.

Of the remaining option sites in the two villages, all are small. The majority have accessibility problems. However, two sites, one opposite Button Common and the other next to the Ingrave Johnston School, are potentially accessible directly from the Brentwood Road. Were these sites removed from the greenbelt by the LDP process, many reasons would remain for not using either of them.

The Brentwood Road (A128) is heavily loaded and has a bottleneck through Herongate and Ingrave. Gridlock is regularly caused by the various junctions through the villages; Billericay Road and the Petrol Station are good examples. Vetoing any new junctions on the A128 would be an excellent way of not making matters worse. In the event that, as mooted, major developments occur in West Horndon and/or Dunton Garden Suburb then the idea of having additional junctions in the bottleneck becomes ludicrous.

These two sites have another common factor; both form a part of the Thames Chase Woodlands. The designations were formally established between the Borough and the Thames Chase organisation. A commitment was made by the Brentwood Borough Council to act for Thames Chase in protecting the sites from harm as special landscape areas and as wildlife habitats. Both areas are proven to support prolific quantities of wildlife. The site opposite Button Common is a County Wildlife site and the other has recently been subjected to detailed ecological studies for mammals, reptiles, amphibians and bats providing proof of the prolific presence of many species in each category. We assume that Brentwood Borough would not even consider reneging on such a formal commitment to Thames Chase. Further, the site opposite Button Common is sandwiched between two conservation areas which would be very badly degraded by building a number of blocks of flats there. Similarly, the site between Hillcrest Nursery and Ingrave Johnston School is the last remaining greenbelt area preventing the conjoining of Ingrave and Herongate. These are two separate villages and residents very much wish them to remain so.

FINAL DRAFT
Herongate and Ingrave Parish Council
Response to Consultation on Brentwood Strategic Growth Options

Assumptions:

1. The six thousand plus building requirement from the Government is fixed.
2. This implies a 20 - 25% growth in Brentwood's population from incomers alone by 2030.
3. The only way that there is any possibility of this huge rate of growth being sustainable is to make an equally huge investment in infrastructure.

It is obvious that piecemeal developments will not make possible any significant income from "106" or similar type commitments making large developments obligatory. Necessary infrastructure improvements would be impossible.

It is equally clear that good quality, productive, agricultural land should be avoided when selecting locations for enormous developments of the type required. If the UK is to grow at this rate, feeding the resident population will become difficult, particularly in a world that is becoming increasingly unstable.

To apply the above to the situation in Herongate and Ingrave; all of the farm land to the east of the A128 (Brentwood Road) as far as Hutton and Billericay is in current productive use and should be left to help feed the country. Additionally, this agricultural land, particularly if, as seems likely, Brentwood Borough is absorbed into London, will be a part of the greenbelt separating our Borough from Billericay and Wickford. The vast majority of this land has very poor access roads which again would make it very unsuitable for large developments.

Of the remaining option sites in the two villages, all are small. The majority have accessibility problems. However, two sites, one opposite Button Common and the other next to the Ingrave Johnston School, are potentially accessible directly from the Brentwood Road. Were these sites removed from the greenbelt by the LDP process, many reasons would remain for not using either of them.

The Brentwood Road (A128) is heavily loaded and has a bottleneck through Herongate and Ingrave. Gridlock is regularly caused by the various junctions through the villages; Billericay Road and the Petrol Station are good examples. Vetoing any new junctions on the A128 would be an excellent way of not making matters worse. In the event that, as mooted, major developments occur in West Horndon and/or Dunton Garden Suburb then the idea of having additional junctions in the bottleneck becomes ludicrous.

These two sites have another common factor; both form a part of the Thames Chase Woodlands. The designations were formally established between the Borough and the Thames Chase organisation. A commitment was made by the Brentwood Borough Council to act for Thames Chase in protecting the sites from harm as special landscape areas and as wildlife habitats. Both areas are proven to support prolific quantities of wildlife. The site opposite Button Common is a County Wildlife site and the other has recently been subjected to detailed ecological studies for mammals, reptiles, amphibians and bats providing proof of the prolific presence of many species in each category. We assume that Brentwood Borough would not even consider reneging on such a formal commitment to Thames Chase. Further, the site opposite Button Common is sandwiched between two conservation areas which would be very badly degraded by building a number of blocks of flats there. Similarly, the site between Hillcrest Nursery and Ingrave Johnston School is the last remaining greenbelt area preventing the conjoining of Ingrave and Herongate. These are two separate villages and residents very much wish them to remain so.

Sites 192/028c/235/349 could be released but could increase congestion on A128

This is brown belt land and is nearer to Brentwood where I understand the need of accommodating additional housing has arisen.

I strongly object to new building on green belt land South of Brentwood.

It would swallow up Ingrave and Herongate. Also badly maintained roads could not cope with extra traffic.

I object to Brentwood's strategic growth , due to the destruction of green belt land and wildlife habits, already congested roads.

I am writing to formally register my objection to Brentwoods Strategic Growth Options Consultation, due to the negative impact I believe it will have on the surrounding communities, wildlife, green belt areas and travel routes.

Some of my questions and concerns are as follows:
1. Why is greenbelt land now being considered for declassification in and around the Brentwood & Basildon area?
2. Isn't Green Belt Land protected to stop developments and urban sprawl?
3. What, if any, consideration has been given to the wildlife that will be impacted with such a large scale development on greenbelt land?
3. With such a large scale proposal why hasn't the local communities been properly consulted and informed?
4. Why is it seen that the A127 has a better scope for improvements and expansion than the A12 when nothing has been done to tackle the current congestion level for existing traffic and basics such as straightening out the Fortune of War roundabout as this has been deemed far too expensive for so many years? Widening of the A127 will only consume more Green Belt Land.
5. Why does Brentwood Council appear to favour the majority of its developments at its most extreme of borders affecting towns other than its own?
6. Why is the deadline for this consultation so short when it will affect so many?

I am logging my objection to the above SGO.

Firstly this is precious protected by law greenbelt land, it homes our much needed wildlife. The farmland is equally as precious as it is ancient land. Heron Hall I understand is a listed building? There are no special circumstances to allow building on this greenbelt/ farmbelt.

I cannot believe that you are also considering making both the a127 and a128 busier than they already are. The roads are already gridlocked and dangerous and developing on this land, providing more housing will make matters worse. I also commute to work on my bike each day and have encountered several near misses on both the a127 and a128. The roads are already overpopulated and dangerous and cannot accommodate traffic at present.

There is no infrastructure in place to accommodate these new proposed developments. - primary & secondary schools are already oversubscribed and full to capacity so are doctors surgeries, dentist and local hospitals and other services.

These development plans will de-value current housing in the area and as a homeowner in the village for 20 years I am extremely angry that you are proposing these developments. I live here because I enjoy village life. Let's keep things that way.

I would also like to add that my whole family feel that the whole consultation procedure has been rather underhanded and most residents in the village are uninformed due to the councils negligence to provide important information regarding their surroundings. The questionnaire is completely flawed and the whole local plan appears to be for monetary gain only. The local plan goes against common sense and logic.

see attached.

See attachment.

see attached

I strongly object to the proposed strategic planning proposal in Herongate and Ingrave.

This would affect the local farm land and increase the conjestion. The traffic is already bad in the villages and as a result there is a current campaign to reduce the speed to 20, following a number of accidents.

Of course the biggest issue is that this is green belt land

I strongly object to the proposed strategic planning proposal in Herongate and Ingrave.

This would affect the local farm land and increase the conjestion. The traffic is already bad in the villages and as a result there is a current campaign to reduce the speed to 20, following a number of accidents.

Of course the biggest issue is that this is green belt land and I firmly believe we should protect this as it was created for very good reason