Question 3
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11587
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Tom Bennett
Yes. Without wishing to be parochial I strongly oppose development of my village (Blackmore) on the grounds that the infrastructure will not be able to cope.
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11611
Received: 11/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Christopher Ringe
No.
Q1: Generally yes, considering the task Brentwood Council is charged with. I think it is generally well thought out.
Q2: Yes, although transport and access would need to be carefully thought through. If every proposed development has at least one car - the problems speak for themselves.
Q3: No.
[Q3 site 076]: I am directly adjacent to a proposed development site (076). I have lived there since 1967. Had the objections lodged at the time been sustained I would have been deprived of what I consider to be an idyllic life and upbringing. I don't see why other people shouldn't have a crack at it also. As stated, I am more concerned with what would be built and for whom, the type of development and access than the actual building on Green Belt itself.
Q4: A127 corridor. I think this area would benefit most.
Q5: Yes, as time passes all areas need to expand slightly or risk becoming stale. I always think that new buildings - carefully planned mind, can hep to revitalise areas. Most villages are only pleasant to live in because they have been allowed to expand.
Q6: No, brownfield is always preferable, but I have no problem with greenfield. I'm always more concerned with what is actually being built, and for whom, rather than the type of site.
Q7: No thoughts on this.
Q8: No, not necessarily. Satellite areas with improved facilities/retail etc will also benefit the town centre.
Q9: Blackmore is largely open space - make of it what you will.
Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Q11: Houses: 3
Commercial / Industrial Buildings: 2
Nature Reserves / Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded / Derelict / Waste Land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 3
Q12: There are more than likely other issues but generally I think it is a well proposed plan.
Q13: Roads and transport links.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11623
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Richard Wright
Particularly concerned about impact of residential development in centre of Ingatestone regarding demands on local infrastructure.
Height of new built must be limited to two storeys.
Woodland landscape at bottom of Post Office Road, which accommodates significant wildlife would be permanantly spoilt.
Finally the point that three storey properties cannot be seen from high street is irrelevant as post office road significantly slopes away from the high street.
see attached.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11637
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Martin Clark
Yes. The transport infrastructure in the A12 corridor already exists and is ideal for growth. Development in the North will need major and costly infrastructure provision.
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11740
Received: 12/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Thomas Lennon
Yes. Housing in these areas should be sympathetic to the local neighbourhoods.
Q1: Yes. All areas have separate issues to be considered.
Q2: Yes. 1) Social housing would be beneficial to allow growth in the villages, in particular brownfield sites. 2) A new bypass is essential to ensure increased traffic is diverted and not interrupt progress in the Town Centre. 3) This area offers the best option for housing and road networks.
Q3: Yes. Housing in these areas should be sympathetic to the local neighbourhoods.
Q4: The A127 Corridor offers the best opportunities for growth and development.
Q5: No. There appears to be enough scope for development alone for housing or new business interests to bring employment growth into the area.
Q6: No. In an ideal world it would be preferable to develop brownfield sites before intruding onto greenfield sites.
Q7: Yes. It is imperative that new sites sit in isolation and are served by separate networks in order not to intrude into housing development.
Q8: Yes. It is important that a Town Centre First approach is taken to improve retail development in order to promote growth in employment.
Q9: No this area is semi rural, there are two large playing fields with children's play areas and one small field with children's playground. To provide further open spaces would mean intrusion into the Green Belt areas.
Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 4
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 3
Tranquility: 4
Other - Public Footpaths: 5
Q11: Houses: 2
Commercial / Industrial Buildings: 2
Nature Reserves / Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded / Derelict / Waste Land: 2
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 2
Other - Public Footpaths: 4
Q12: Yes. New and much improved broadband connection would be a considerable asset.
Q13: This would be expensive (any figure, not known) but necessary.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11769
Received: 12/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Donald Mackenzie
Yes. Doddinghurst does not have the infrastructure to support further development. Small school, shop car park already overflowing, narrow twisting roads in and out of village. The suggested development would substantially dilute the quality of life in this rural community.
Q1: Yes.
Q2: Yes.
Q3: Yes. Doddinghurst does not have the infrastructure to support further development. Small school, shop car park already overflowing, narrow twisting roads in and out of village. The suggested development would substantially dilute the quality of life in this rural community.
Q5: No.
Q6: Brownfield sites should be given priority.
Q7: Yes.
Q8: Yes.
Q9: No.
Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Q11: Houses: 3
Commercial / Industrial Buildings: 2
Nature Reserves / Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded / Derelict / Waste Land: 1
Infrastructure: 1
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 2
Q12: No.
Q13: To build new homes adjacent to easily accessible amenities such as shops and restaurants.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11840
Received: 12/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs M Craddock
Brownfield sites should be used for future building before exploiting greenfield sites.
New, appropriate infrastructure should be carefully planned before any building takes place.
My concern is that West Horndon will no longer be a village, its character treasured by local residents.
Q1: Yes. The character of the areas is completely different.
Q2: No. A127 at full capacity - widening could cause massive problems for local residents. Flooding, already a recurring problem, does not seem to have been addressed. Open fenland, with its wildlife and beauty, is greatly valued by residents of West Horndon.
Q3: Site 200 [Entire Land East of A128, south of A127] massively preferred to 037 [A/B/C - Land West of Thorndon Avenue, West Horndon], 038 [A/B - Land East of Thorndon Avenue, West Horndon], and 126 [Land East of West Horndon, South of Station Road].
Brownfield sites should be used for future building before exploiting greenfield sites.
New, appropriate infrastructure should be carefully planned before any building takes place.
My concern is that West Horndon will no longer be a village, its character treasured by local residents.
Q4: Site 200 has the greater potential to afford future benefit for the village of West Horndon.
Development unsuitable in sites 037 A,B,C [Land West of Thorndon Avenue, West Horndon] and 038 A,B [Land East of Thorndon Avenue, West Horndon] which are prone to becoming water logged - please refer to paragraph 100 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Q5: Yes. Sustainable development in the Borough of Brentwood should be sought in all areas of the Borough, and especially along the A12 Corridor, to address the projected level of housing needs.
Q6: Brownfield sites are preferable for development of housing. Greenfield sites should only be used when distinct levels of benefit to the existing area are proved.
Q7: Yes. Employment opportunities are a must, and accessible by road, rail and public transport (including buses).
Q8: Yes.
Q9: Not sure.
Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 4
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 3
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 4
Tranquility: 5
Other - Flooding Prevention: 5
Q11: Houses: 3
Commercial / Industrial Buildings: 3
Nature Reserves / Wildlife: 3
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 2
Degraded / Derelict / Waste Land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 2
Q12: Yes. Travel links to surrounding areas/communities.
Q13: An holistic infrastructure Plan must be delivered to ensure development is undertaken in a sustainable manner.
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11860
Received: 20/04/2015
Respondent: Mr Ian Drake
This is green-belt - it should not be built on.
See attached
Object
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11885
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Laura Lovell
I object to any Green Belt land being proposed for growth options in Brentwood, it would open the flood gates to housing estates being built on all open land.
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11886
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Laura Lovell
If the proposals get applied it would be a travesty for Brentwood, it would become a London suburb, existing villages/hamlets would be lost forever. It is popular because it has open spaces. Brentwood Council should look at how Romford/Havering have lost all that was once special. Every green space there has had flats built, there is lots more crime and unhappiness with its residents. It would be a travesty if Brentwood followed suit.
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11958
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs Sarah Lafferty
The land identified in Ingrave and Herongate is special countryside and should be preserved. The open spaces are enjoyed by not only residents but visitors to the area for recreation. Areas like these make Brentwood a great place to live. If we build on the green space the town and villages will lose their identity, the adverse impact on the environment and wildlife will be immense. The quality of life for residents will be damaged considerable.
see attached.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 11971
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs Susan Webb
I very much favour the A12 and A127 corridors which already have a much better infrastructure and transport situation and where there are few issues on maintenance of Village Feel or Green Belt
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12000
Received: 21/04/2015
Respondent: Mrs J.M. Wix
Yes - the future of housing need is surely a matter for the whole of Brentwood.
See attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12014
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs Vera Grigg
Yes. The A127 Corridor is the most suitable as it lies between the A127 and the railway. Not prime agricultural land, room for expansion between these two networks. Already a core of infrastructure which could be added to.
A12 Corridor - Yes if confined to areas between A12 and railway.
North of the Borough - Only if small sites were made available.
Q1: No. The areas specified do not mention [sites] 028C [Land east of Running Waters, Brentwood] and 192 [Heron Hall, Herongate, Brentwood] plus sites on the edge of the Green Belt south of Hutton 028A/B [Land east of Running Waters, Brentwood]. These are huge areas of land that are not part of the A12 and A127 Corridors, nor villages to the North of the Borough. This specific area is not considered, shown but not part of the planning.
Q2: No. North of the Borough - Insufficient attention to infrastructure - transport, schools, GPs.
A12 Corridor - Yes.
A127 Corridor - Yes.
No mention of [sites] 028A,B,C [Land east of Running Waters, Brentwood] and 192 [Heron Hall, Herongate, Brentwood] - Green Belt which should not be used for housing. Now much used by walkers, open space, historical woodlands, ample footpaths and good tracks. Home to much wildlife, birds, small mammals. Should not be touched as page 27 consultation document. Difficulty of ingress/egress to Hall Lane - no pavements and too much traffic on Hanging Hill Lane.
Q3: Yes. The A127 Corridor is the most suitable as it lies between the A127 and the railway. Not prime agricultural land, room for expansion between these two networks. Already a core of infrastructure which could be added to.
A12 Corridor - Yes if confined to areas between A12 and railway.
North of the Borough - Only if small sites were made available.
Q4: The A127 Corridor.
Q5: No. But only if between A12 and railway.
Q6: To develop brownfield sites.
Q7: Yes.
Q8: Yes. In order for Brentwood to remain a town it needs a town centre. Out of town shopping areas are losing their attraction and they are accessible nearby - Gallows Corner and Chelmsford.
Q9: No. With all the Green Belt around us at [sites] 028A,B,C [Land east of Running Waters, Brentwood] and 192 [Heron Hall, Herongate, Brentwood] we delight in the open spaces available to us.
Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Other - Accessibility: 5
Q11: Houses: 3
Commercial / Industrial Buildings: 1
Nature Reserves / Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded / Derelict / Waste Land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 4
Q12: Yes. Growth of present population - schools expansion.
Q13: Transport. GP facilities. Education - schools.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12091
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Keith Godbee
The A127 corridor seems the best option followed by the A12 corridor as
they have the best links.
The area to the north of the borough should be protected especially the
conservation areas as they provide an amenity for all to enjoy.
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12145
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs Susan Tappenden
The land identified in Ingrave and Herongate is special countryside and should be
preserved. The open spaces are enjoyed by residents and visitors. Areas like these make Brentwood a great place to live. If we build on the green space the town and villages will lose their identity, the adverseimpact on the environment and wildlife will be immense. The quality of life for residents will be damaged considerable.
see attached.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12161
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Roland Lazarus
The most inappropriate sites seem to be the large areas to the east of Hutton, Ingrave and Warley.
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12173
Received: 22/04/2015
Respondent: Valerie Godbee
Expanding urban areas such as Brentwood, Shenfield and West Horndon make sense as this is where transport links (train, bus and road) are most efficient and local amenities, shops, leisure facilities are located. This would have the added benefit of reducing air pollution as less car miles would be made.
See attached.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12174
Received: 22/04/2015
Respondent: Valerie Godbee
Building on green belt is detrimental to everybody as this is the 'lungs' of communities. Everyone enjoys our countryside and to build on the existing green belt would deprive everyone of this and make all our communities the same. Villages and village life would be gone forever.
See attached.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12175
Received: 22/04/2015
Respondent: Valerie Godbee
Consideration must be given to conservation areas. Blackmore has a large conservation area and must be preserved. Suggested/proposed sites that are in conservation areas should automatically be disregarded. For example sites 202 and 052. These are both in the historic centre which includes the 900 year old Church of St Laurence with its wooden bell tower which is the oldest in England. Additionally sites immediately adjacent or, very close to, conservation areas should also be disregarded for development as this would impact these areas.
See attached.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12280
Received: 17/02/2015
Respondent: Miss Kirsty Wilson
Green Belt Land should remain protected, its main purpose is to protect land around urban centres from urban sprawl, maintain forestry and agricultural areas and wildlife habitats. There are numerous run down commercial sites on non-green belt land that would benefit from regeneration.
Rural areas lack infrastructure required for development, they are for farming communities and not fit for large development. It will affect local residents and communities, such as residents, horse-riders, dog-walkers, who rely on access to woodland and whose safety is already jeopardised by traffic.
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12397
Received: 23/04/2015
Respondent: Countryside Properties
Agent: Andrew Martin Planning Ltd
Land to the east and west of Thorndon Avenue has been promoted for development via the LDF since 2009, when the SHLAA was commenced. It is considered that the assumprtion of the 2011 SHLAA are out of date and the supply of land identified may not be sufficient to meet the 2-14 OAN.In June 2014 BNP Paribas Real Estate were appointed by BBC to consider the viability and delivery of all sites identified in the Council's Preferred Options Plan. Details were requested in respect of land to the east of West Horndon being promoted by Countryside Properties (see plan at Appendix 1). The outcome of this work is still awaited.
See attached.
Support
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12405
Received: 23/04/2015
Respondent: Countryside Properties
Agent: Andrew Martin Planning Ltd
West Horndon remains an important site for growth because of its overall sustainability credentials. There is the scope to maximize the potential of this location and increase the quantum of development as previously proposed by the Council. These representations will demonstrate that there is the potential to develop land to the east and west of the existing settlement of West Horndon and provide a balanced expanded community that builds upon and strengthens the existing village centre by adding to its existing facilities and services. The land is readily accessible to public transport services and facilities. Transport benefits for the existing community can further be maximized by economies of scale.
See attached.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12447
Received: 18/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs. Harlow
Yes. It is never appropriate to sacrifice Green Belt and areas of beauty to commercial or living purposes. In this overcrowded world these areas are even more precious.
Q1: No. I question very strongly the need for growth anywhere in Brentwood. The area is already overcrowded, services etc are struggling to cope.
Q2: No.
Q3: Yes. It is never appropriate to sacrifice Green Belt and areas of beauty to commercial or living purposes. In this overcrowded world these areas are even more precious.
Q4: This road is already much too busy and dangerous.
Q6: Brownfield sites.
Q7: The highway network needs to be hugely updated and enlarged first.
Q8: Yes.
Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 4
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 3
Q11: Houses: 4
Commercial / Industrial Buildings: 3
Nature Reserves / Wildlife: 2
Farmland: 3
Woodland: 3
Degraded / Derelict / Waste Land: 2
Infrastructure: 3
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 2
Q13: Roads. Water, sewerage. Lighting (safety). Schools. All healthcare facilities. Sport and leisure facilities.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12465
Received: 18/02/2015
Respondent: Mrs Martin
Yes. To have Green Belt is precious to keep.
Q1: No. Brentwood is too busy and overcrowded already.
Q2: No.
Q3: Yes. To have Green Belt is precious to keep.
Q4: This road is used too much already and dangerous.
Q5: No. Growth in Brentwood now is overcrowded and services are finding it hard to cope.
Q6: Brownfield.
Q7: The roads need to enlarge.
Q8: Yes.
Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 4
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 3
Q11: Houses: 4
Commercial / Industrial Buildings: 3
Nature Reserves / Wildlife: 2
Farmland: 3
Woodland: 3
Degraded / Derelict / Waste Land: 2
Infrastructure: 3
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 2
Q13: Roads. Lighting. Healthcare. Schools.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12549
Received: 24/04/2015
Respondent: Mr Martin Sorrell
None of the sites are ideal though West Horndon seems the best on the criteria
you have used though I thought the government was working to protect our
environment by reducing pollution and all these proposed sites would just
increase it in the long term.
see attached
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12585
Received: 24/04/2015
Respondent: Barwood Land and Estates Ltd
Agent: Chilmark Consulting Limited
Figure 8 at page 16 provides a helpful overview map of housing and mixed-use site options that have been put forward for consideration. The text at paragraph 3.9 identified that the sites shown in Figure 8 include those considered within the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) and also in the 2013
Preferred Options Consultation.
See attached questionnaire.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12591
Received: 24/04/2015
Respondent: Barwood Land and Estates Ltd
Agent: Chilmark Consulting Limited
The 'West Horndon Strategic Allocation' and the 'Dunton Garden Suburb' alternative must relate fully to the existing pattern of settlements, the hierarchy of centres and the available infrastructure identified in the Borough in order to be sustainable. In order to make the West Horndon allocation, or the Dunton Garden Suburb sustainable and viable (in accordance with all aspects of the NPPF definition of sustainable development) there would be a need for significant new social, community, transport, environmental and green infrastructure to be delivered which are costly requirements and will take some significant time to be provided and become fully established to the benefit of the future residents, with consequent implications for the timing of delivery of housing.
See attached questionnaire.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12599
Received: 24/04/2015
Respondent: Barwood Land and Estates Ltd
Agent: Chilmark Consulting Limited
Fundamentally the West Horndon allocation or the Dunton Garden Suburb proposals represent long-term, phased development schemes that are likely to make a significant contribution to housing and economic growth only in the latter part of the plan period. There are other locations in the Borough, through which new residential and economic growth can be secured early in the plan period, making best use of existing, available infrastructure. Such locations are well placed to maximise the benefits of new committed infrastructure arising from the Crossrail rail development that will be completed and operational by 2018, within the early part of the plan period.
See attached questionnaire.
Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 12620
Received: 10/02/2015
Respondent: Sunbury Homes
Agent: JCN Design
With regard to brownfield sites, preparation of criteria based policy as part of the Local Plan will ensure that a robust approach to housing sites in the Green Belt is created. The new Local Plan also needs to allocate brownfield sites that are currently available for development - the two approaches need to run in parallel in order to ensure that the openness of the Green Belt is protected at the same time as the borough identifies sufficient sites to meet its housing need.
The Council should consider as part of the allocation of sites for residential use, the environmental and social benefits of redeveloping non-compliant and un-neighbourly industrial uses that cause harm to the Green Belt.
see attached