See attached

Q1: No - I consider one of the main points was not allowing building on Green Belt land which will not be the case in Blackmore if this is agreed to.

Q2: No.

Q3: Yes - Blackmore does not need further traffic, the school is already at full capacity and local lanes are already busy.

Q4: Definitely along the A127 corridor.

Q5: Yes - Only on a small scale.

Q6: Brownfield sites would be preferable to greenfield sites. Don't make our villages into towns no urban sprawl.

Q7: Yes - This makes sense, Blackmore is quite an isolated village with small lanes to and from.

Q8: Yes - To save our local shopping areas and not overdevelop out of town shops and centres that kill local towns, we don't want to end up as Kent is.

Q9: No - We have lovely open fields and woodland, please keep it that way.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty: 5
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Community spirit: 5

Q11:
Houses: 3
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 2
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 2
Infrastructure: 3
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 4

Q12: Yes.

Q13: Maintaining existing road to a good condition, education facilities.

Q1: No - I and most people I speak to see no pressing need for growth in Brentwood, we feel this is being thrust upon us by central government. If there was local planning autonomy the concept would be thrown out.

Q2: No - Too much Green Belt areas that the Council have chosen to call 'grazing'.

Q3: Yes - 107 could be residential. 042 Has planning permission but has not been developed so much for 'urgent need'. The housing proposal for the Crown, Ingatestone seemed reasonable with good parking facilities. The Parish Council appeared even.

Q5: No - There is a need for villages to keep identity and not become a ribbon sprawl.

Q6: Brownfield only yes/no boxes not valid for multiple options.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes - Oh for Brentwood to be more like Chelmsford.

Q9: No.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty: 4
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 4
Historic Interest: 4
Tranquility: 2

Q11: What a silly presentation how can these be 'occasional' or 'frequent'? Was somebody paid to produce this?

Q1: Yes - Gypsy and traveller sites should not be considered, initial illegality on Green Belt land should not be rewarded.

Q2: The infrastructure is incapable of supporting a lot of additional housing. Apart from roads, schools, doctors parking etc. There is a serious problem with sewage.

Q3: No - Overbuilding in the area. The sewage floods frequently (See Anglia Water compliant reference 50453314). It bubbled out many times in 2014 along footpath 37.

Q5: No - The Green Belt should be preserved at all costs.

Q6: Only brownfield.

Q7: Most people in Ingatestone commute to London.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty: 5
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 3
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 4
Tranquility: 5

Q11:
Houses: 4
Commercial/Industrial buildings: 2
Nature Reserves/Wildlife: 3
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 3
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 2
Infrastructure: 3
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 2

Q12: Sewage (Q3)

Q13: Parking, sewage , doctors, schools.

Q1: Yes - I agree with expansion providing that priority is given to local residents or for whose people working in Brentwood area and want to move nearer their workplace and are of a small development type. I would not like to see a travellers encampment put in this area.

Q2: Yes - Some area could do with upgrading but only on a small scale as I feel the roads would need extensive planing to take lots of traffic.

Q3: Yes - There are many sites in this locality which seem to be businesses (scrap yard, car repairs etc) which have already encroached on supposedly Green Belt land it would be better to see decent housing built also there would not be such heavy traffic on the small lanes around this area.

Q4: All sites should have the capacity for growth providing on a small scale due to the area situation. Large scale developments would put a great strain on all roads around the A127 corridor.

Q5: Yes - Small sites would be better released on the edge of urban areas see Q3 for comment.

Q6: There are many sites which I would personally not consider Green Belt sites but due to their status were never allowed for development previously these could be used for small developments.

Q7: Yes - There would need to be upgrading on all areas in the area especially to be able to reach A127 or A12.

Q8: Retail development should remain in the Town Centre but not anymore food outlets including restaurants, bars, nightclubs lets give small businesses a chance.

Q9: In this area there are only small areas that in my opinion are not large enough to provide open space for parkland.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty: 1
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 1
Wildlife Interest: 3
Historic Interest: 1
Tranquility: 1
Other - Salvage Yards: 5

Q11:
Houses: 1
Commercial/Industrial buildings: 1
Farmland: 1
Woodland: 1
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 4
Infrastructure: 1
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 1
Other - Salvage Yards: 4

Q12: Yes - I would like to see the land in this area released for affordable housing at it is mainly plot land I would resist attempts to house travellers families legally or illegally.

Q13: Upgrading area that are a eyesore and would remove very large lorries from the small lanes that are not built to take this type of traffic.

see attached

Q1: Yes - I totally agree with expansion providing that priority is given to local residents and are of a small development.

Q2: Yes - This would be an on going situation when planning and development takes place in these areas and would have to be fine tuned as progress is made.

Q3: Yes - There are many sites in a locality which seem to be business (scrap yards) which have encroached on supposedly Green Belt land. It would be far more appropriate to see these areas cleared and decent housing provided.

Q4: I would only be able to comment on sites local to myself.

Q5: Yes - Any site that has the same situation as Q3 should be considered.

Q6: There are many sites which I would personally not consider are Green Belt sites but due to their status were never allowed for development previously.

Q7: Yes - Some local roads will obviously need to be upgraded.

Q8: Yes - Although I would like the Town Centre to remain the hub of the economy I feel we do not need anymore food outlets, restaurants, bars, nightclubs.

Q9: No - There is only plots of land not large enough to provide open space for parkland.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty: 1
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 1
Wildlife Interest: 3
Historic Interest: 1
Tranquility: 1
Other - Scrapyard: 5

Q11:
Houses: 2
Commercial/Industrial buildings: 4
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 1
Farmland: 3
Woodland: 3
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 4
Infrastructure: 1
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 1
Other - Scrapyard: 4

Q12: Yes - I would like to see plot land locally used for small decent affordable houses for local residents. I would resist attempt to house travellers legally or illegally.

Q13: Upgrading areas that are a blight on the landscape which people here had to suffer for many many years.

See attached

See attached.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - Blackmore just has not got the facilities to accommodate 100 houses with families i.e. only got a small Primary School, one small store, likely to lose Post Office.

Q4: Dunton.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: Both. Greenfield sites should not spoil villages and their amenities.

Q7: No.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: Yes.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty: 5
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 3
Wildlife Interest: 4
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Low noise levels: 5

Q11:
Houses: 3
Commercial/Industrial buildings: 2
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 3
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 3
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 2
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 2

Q12: Yes.

Q13: Roads, schools, shops.

See attached

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - The use of brownfield sites with good local amenities within areas having good local transport to areas that provide employment opportunities is more desirable than greenfield sites with limited amenities and require private transport on country lanes to places of work and schooling.

Q4: Dunton Garden Suburb.

Q5: No.

Q6: No to both but if an option is needed then brownfield site.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty: 5
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 3
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5

Q11:
Houses: 3
Commercial/Industrial buildings: 1
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 1
Infrastructure: 1
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 2

Q12: Services such as sewage etc.

Q13: To improve the quality of life without adversely affecting the status quo.

See attached.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - A127 corridor provides access to major roads, A127, A128, M25. Development on other sites would cause major road access problems.

Q4: Option 2 and development east and west of Horndon.

Q5: No - Not if this incorporates Hutton, where increase in road access to west is limited to minor roads, reduced access to walks, woods and ancient sites.

Q6: Greenfield sites on the edges of villages use key to the quality of living in these areas. Development in these areas should be avoided at all costs.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No - Not unless the social benefits of Green Belt are involved/removed.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty: 5
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 4
Historic Interest: 3
Tranquility: 4

Q11:
Houses: 3
Commercial/Industrial buildings: 1
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 3
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste Land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 3
Other - Footpaths: 4

Q12: No - Provide greater attention to the effect of reducing Green Belt, the major attraction of living in Brentwood.

Q13:
1. Early development of all brownfield sites excluding Green Belt.
2. Town Centre development.
3. Prioritise joint plan with Basildon - Dunton.
4. Utilise scrubland on south of A127.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - We do not have the infrastructure in Blackmore to cope with more homes and a big population. It would spoil the village.

Q4: Dunton Garden Suburb. It would help take the pressure.

Q5: No.

Q6: Brownfield sites within Green Belt plots between existing homes.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes - As "High Streets" are dying.

Q9: No - If left alone, we have enough open spaces.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty/Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation/Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5

Q11:
Houses: 2
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 1
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 3
Farmland: 3
Woodland: 3
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 2
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 3

Q12: Yes.

Q13: Using the rail where possible and take care of wildlife habitat.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - I don't think our village services could cope with more homes.

Q4: Dunton Garden Suburb to help take off the pressure.

Q5: No.

Q6: Brownfield within Green Belt.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes - Most High Street are in a bad way. So I think we should help support them.

Q9: No - We are lucky to have open spaces.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty/Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation/Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5

Q11:
Houses: 2
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 1
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 3
Farmland: 3
Woodland: 3
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 2
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 3

Q12: Yes.

Q13: Helping protect our wildlife and better transport.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: No - Flood risk and potential is not addressed. Open areas and farmland are vital and not given enough consideration. General infrastructure and transportation is not considered adequately and neither is the impact of road widening schemes.

Q3: Yes - Use of brownfield sites should be considered more effectively for housing over Green Belt, however, the density of housing needs to be considered carefully for the impact on the locality. Flood issues are not considered neither is the impact on natural resources and wildlife, some development in Dunton is preferred with limitations.

Q4: A12 corridor has more potential than A127 and also the greater capacity. Again flood risk is important village environment. Should be maintained. Development of a Dunton village is preferable to growing existing villages.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: Brownfield sites are preferable. Greenfield is essential for food production, local amenities and wildlife use of greenfield should only be considered where no other alternative is available.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: Yes.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty/Attractiveness: 4
Outdoor Recreation/Leisure Use: 3
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 4
Tranquility: 5
Other - Agriculture: 4

Q11:
Houses: 3
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 3
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 3
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 2
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 1
Infrastructure: 3
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 2

Q12: Yes - The whole road network needs considering as do the serious flood issues. Other infrastructure issues such as adequate drainage and general local amenities.

Q13: Supporting and maintaining existing infrastructure is essential prior to future development.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - It would seem logical to adopt the A127 corridor option especially if co-operation is obtained with Basildon council's plans. However as I do not know the area well my opinion may well be in conflict with the opinion of West Horndon residents! Some limited development could be possible north of the borough but only limited because the transportation links, schools, sewage etc.

Q4: A127 corridor if this can be reasonably achieved.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: Ideally brownfield sites.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes - However, there is a need to retain existing retail shops in the wider area e.g. in villages to maintain the accessibility and character. Losing shops in the villages would be a disaster for local inhabitants.

Q9: Yes - Yes there would be if the sites at the top of the Woollard Way and Orchard Piece were turned into an allotment area or nature reserve! The agricultural land must be preserved at all costs.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty/Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation/Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5

Q11:
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 2
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 3
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 3
Other - Village green, allotment allocations pending

Q12: Yes - But I don't know if you've solved them.

Q13: Road upkeep. Healthcare provision in the villages. Education. But must maintain Green Belt, recreation facilities, green infrastructure. See p.31 section 6.9.
N.B. Not infrastructure but NB the Bus Service must go to the health centres. Old people are dependent on public transport.

Consultation Comments: I would like to protest in the strongest possible terms at the short timescale for completion of this questionnaire. It was only distributed towards the end of this week i.e. 12/02/15 with insufficient and inaccurate supporting information.

see attached

Q1: No - Not all areas seem appropriate.

Q2: Cannot comment on all areas.

Q3: Yes - Blackmore - This is an historic village. It is a village with a small school, which must already be under pressure, having had to take in the Travellers children. The doctors surgery is I would think under pressure too. There is no land to extend the school where it is.

Q4: Where there are towns not villages.

Q6: The fields in Blackmore should remain it's parcel of Green Belt. These have been used for grazing (cows and horses) and should remain as such for future use. The centre village has one shop and no ground for building on. Parking there is a problem from 8.30am each day onward.

Q7: Building in a town area seems to be the most sensible idea. Working people prefer to be near bus and train networks this is certainly not the case in Blackmore.

Q8: Yes - Certainly.

Q9: No, Blackmore is a small village but to start extending the population you would end up by having to build a larger school, more shops etc and end up turning this village who's history includes a 900 year old church and history of Henry VIII's son back here into a town.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty/Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation/Leisure Use: 3
Wildlife Interest: 4
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 4
Other - Care for our village: 5

Q11:
Houses: 2
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 2
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 3

Q12: Yes - Consideration of the people who live in the areas you have high lighted.

Q13: To build in areas which are already built up areas.

Q1: No - Small villages north of the A12 do not have adequate transport links. Increasing housing in Blackmore by 10% will change the aesthetics of the village forever and consequently will no longer be a village.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - Blackmore - Sewage capacity unavailable at one of these sites. Phone lines are at capacity at Orchard Piece. The Primary School is at capacity. The village roads are not able to cope with increased car use. The wildlife will suffer - barn owls, little owls and tawny owls all present behind Orchard Piece.

Q4: The A127 corridor. It contains the single settlement of Horndon and not several and the A12 and nor them villages cannot cope with any more traffic congestion, including Brentwood through the town and Ongar Road. Services would suffer more and they are already strained.

Q5: No - Again, services and infrastructure in these surrounding areas are already at or over coping capacity. The towns and villages around these areas are developed enough, the traffic is always built up, roads unable to cope, queues into small towns built up throughout the day, schools already at capacity, services full and don't run enough.

Q6: Neither option is preferable, constraining opportunity for growth is a need in some places to preserve our Green Belt land, its wildlife, asset to villages and landscape character. The areas just aren't suitable, already constrained transport links, sewage at capacity, phone lines at capacity, schools at capacity, wildlife already suffering in the UK. The areas could not cope!

Q7: Between Thurrock, Basildon and Havering where highways and towns are less congested than A12 and north, perhaps.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty/Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation/Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5

Q11:
Houses: 3
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 1
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 2
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 3

Q12: Brentwood Borough is beautiful and attractive because of its rural areas and wildlife. Please don't take this away and squander its environment and the quality of life it offers by developing the areas considered treasures to so many.

Q13: Green infrastructure.

see attached