Question 7

Showing comments and forms 481 to 510 of 561

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11555

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs Jenny Jobbins

Representation Summary:

Yes. Subject to the need to retain and sustain village communities.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11566

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Gary Sanders

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11578

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Garry Steptowe

Representation Summary:

Yes. Local employment is key to any residential development. If the industrial estate in West Horndon were to be developed then replacement employment opportuntiies must be located within the local area. Employees must however be able to get work via public transport as well as via road.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11590

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Tom Bennett

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11601

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Kevin Nicholson

Representation Summary:

Yes. The most sustainable approach would be to allocate the new sites close to the Strategic highway network. By grouping the employment and residential space close to these main networks this would be the most efficient and effective. Allowing easier access to emaployment for the new residents to the area and fostering economic growth.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11616

Received: 11/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Christopher Ringe

Representation Summary:

No thoughts on this.

Full text:

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.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11628

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Richard Wright

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

see attached.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11641

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Martin Clark

Representation Summary:

There are few employment opportunities in the villages north of the Borough and there is little chance of any being provided. Distributing developments around villages in this area would only lead to increased traffic on already busy rural roads.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11682

Received: 11/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs Blanche Dust

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

Q1: Yes. My main concern is that by allowing landowners of Green Belt sites to put forward their land for inclusion in the Plan, it will put a blight on households that border their land.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Don't agree to the following sites in the Plan:
028 A/B/C Land East of Running Waters, Brentwood
067 A/B Salmonds Farm, Salmonds Grove, Ingrave
146 Land adjacent to Hillcrest Nursery
192 Heron Hall, Herongate
183 Former sewage pumping station, Ingrave Hall, Ingrave

Q4: West Horndon.

Q5: Don't know.

Q6: Develop brownfield sites.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Other - Public Footpaths: 5

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

Q12: Yes.

Q13: Schools, healthcare.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11702

Received: 11/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Peter Dust

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

Q1: Yes. I am concerned that by allowing landowners of Green Belt sites to put forward their land for inclusion in the Plan, it will put a blight on properties that border their land.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Don't agree to the following sites in the Plan:
028 A/B/C Land East of Running Waters, Brentwood
067 A/B Salmonds Farm, Salmonds Grove, Ingrave
146 Land adjacent to Hillcrest Nursery
192 Heron Hall, Herongate
183 Former sewage pumping station, Ingrave Hall, Ingrave

Q4: West Horndon.

Q5: Don't know.

Q6: Develop brownfield sites.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Other - Public Footpaths: 5

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

Q12: Yes.

Q13: Schools, healthcare.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11725

Received: 12/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Graham Cooper

Representation Summary:

Yes. That's why Dunton Garden is a good plan.

Full text:

Q1: Yes. I understand the need for growth, but any considered areas must take local resident views into account. Infrastructure must be one of the most important points, and what impact will development bring.

Q2: Yes. Any Local Plan must take all aspects into account with all residents views taken into account to have a good outcome.

Q3: Yes. When reading the consultations regarding the Brentwood Strategic Growth Options, it would appear to me that the most suitable options would be the Dunton Garden Suburb as the existing travel links are already in place.

Q4: As stated above [see Rep ID 11719] Dunton Garden Suburb would be most suitable. Very good travel links, which would help travel.

Q5: Yes. Only after all other options have been considered.

Q6: Brownfield sites would be better.

Q7: Yes. That's why Dunton Garden is a good plan.

Q8: Yes. The Town Centre should remain sustainable and improvements made.

Q9: No. Other than farmland there is not much open space left, that would be suitable.

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

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

Q12: Yes.

Q13: Suitable housing with good transport links.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11732

Received: 20/04/2015

Respondent: Mr & Mrs John and Rebecca Gaymer

Number of people: 2

Agent: JB Planning Associates Ltd.

Representation Summary:

The Brentwood Economic Futures 2015-2031 anticipates and increase in jobs in all sectors which equates to a total of up to 23 hectares. we consider that it would be entirely logical to allocate new sites close to the strategic highway network. The A12 in particular provides good accessibility to the central part of the Borough, identified in the consultation document as an important transport corridor. Proximity to the strategic highway network will facilitate easy access to jobs for residents across the Borough (as well as those living in adjacent boroughs), thereby increasing the attractiveness of potential sites for firms seeking to relocate or establish new premises.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11733

Received: 20/04/2015

Respondent: Mr & Mrs John and Rebecca Gaymer

Number of people: 2

Agent: JB Planning Associates Ltd.

Representation Summary:

In the contaxt of the idnetified 23 ha additional employment land need, we consider Site 079C (Land surrounded by A12 & A12 exit slip road) to be a particularly suitable and sustainable site, which is located adjacent to the junction of the A12 and B1002 and the existing urban edge of Ingatestone. The enclosed illustrative layout (drawing 1250/02-08) demonstrates one way in which this site could be appropriately developed for employment uses. The site is currently available and deliverable.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11744

Received: 12/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Thomas Lennon

Representation Summary:

Yes. It is imperative that new sites sit in isolation and are served by separate networks in order not to intrude into housing development.

Full text:

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.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11759

Received: 12/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs. Margaret Thorpe

Representation Summary:

No. A127 has already too much traffic on it.

Full text:

Q1: No. All areas with unused properties should be used first.

Q2: No to Dunton Garden Suburb.

Q3: Yes. Building on industrial estate will improve village.

Q4: Not on Green Belt.

Q5: Only if on brownfield sites.

Q6: Only brownfield sites.

Q7: No. A127 has already too much traffic on it.

Q9: No.

Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 3
Wildlife Interest: 3
Historic Interest: 2
Tranquility: 1

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

Q12: Yes. The flooding resultant of the building on fenland (flood plain).

Q13: Adequate bus services.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11773

Received: 12/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Donald Mackenzie

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

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.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11809

Received: 12/02/2015

Respondent: Mr and Mrs John and Linda Minch

Representation Summary:

Yes. To relocate employment sites such as West Horndon Industrial Park it is important that it is within the A12 Corridor with good access to major road networks but ideally with access to public transport.

Full text:

Q1: Yes. Splitting the Borough into three areas appears to make sense due to the different characteristics of these areas.

Q2: No. Road and rail infrastructure is overstretched. A127 at peak times is at a standstill and c2c is packed at peak times with no seats available, which will only get worse. Flood risk has not been assessed, we have flooding in Thorndon Avenue and roads around Dunton often flooded on slip road.

Q3: Yes. 020 and 021 industrial estates in West Horndon are brownfield sites and in my opinion if we have to have extra housing, this would be the preferred option, rather than Green Belt land. But there would need to have schools, doctors and public transport to satisfy demand.

Q4: Site 200 (Dunton Garden Suburb) is preferred to other sites as it would give a large number of housing in one location, although it would put a strain on surrounding road and rail networks.

Q5: Yes. Suitable sites should be included in the A12 Corridor to spread the impact on one area.

Q6: Where there are suitable brownfield sites these should be developed first as in West Horndon Industrial Park as it provides housing in a good location without damaging Green Belt land.

Q7: Yes. To relocate employment sites such as West Horndon Industrial Park it is important that it is within the A12 Corridor with good access to major road networks but ideally with access to public transport.

Q8: Yes. There does need to be local shops for villages but focus needs to be on Town Centres.

Q9: Yes. The park in Cadogan Avenue in West Horndon could be enhanced and expanded. If they build the Dunton Garden Suburb they could put in park areas.

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

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. If the Dunton Garden Suburb gets the go ahead it would need a train station, otherwise the residents would drive to neighbouring stations at West Horndon or Laindon which would cause chaos at peak times, and Laindon would not have enough allocated parking in station car parks, and there would need to be better bus services.

Q13: Given the scale of development proposed in A127 Corridor it would need to be evenly spread between education, transport, healthcare, community facilities and green space.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11821

Received: 20/04/2015

Respondent: Mrs Doreen Worth

Representation Summary:

It depends on the nature of the employment. For a distribution warehouse I would say "Yes" because of the need for deliveries and collections. For a superstore I would probably say "Yes" again. For smaller shops the case is not so clear cut. For non-industrial employment premises I would say it is probably more important to allocate the sites near to the rail network.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11822

Received: 15/02/2015

Respondent: CEG Land Promotions Limited

Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd

Representation Summary:

The nature of modern employment uses requires easy and safe access to the strategic road network. This avoids the difficulties and dangers associated with commercial HGVs and large traffic volumes conflicting with the domestic scale usage of residential roads and community facilities.
There is a continuing need to encourage suitable employment uses across a full range of employment sectors. Locations will need to be carefully selected.
As illustrated in Appendix A, there are opportunities to deliver important and sustainable employment areas at Dunton with its easy access to both the A127 and A128 routes and the ability to site the various uses to avoid conflict.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11845

Received: 12/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs M Craddock

Representation Summary:

Yes. Employment opportunities are a must, and accessible by road, rail and public transport (including buses).

Full text:

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.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11866

Received: 20/04/2015

Respondent: Mr Ian Drake

Representation Summary:

Yes. If the highways are greatly improved.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11872

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr John Warner

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

Q1: Yes. A12 and A127 should be promoted.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes. It is not appropriate to develop sites 76 [Land south of Redrose Lane, north of Orchard Piece, Blackmore], 77 [Land south of Redrose Lane, north of Woollard Way, Blackmore], 199 [Land to the East of Ingatestone Road, Blackmore], 202 [Land to the South of Blackmore, off Blackmore Road] and 203 [Land to the West of Blackmore, off Blackmore Road] as this is a conservation area and within the Green Belt.

Q4: Dunton Garden Suburb.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: Brownfield sites must be developed in preference to green sites.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes. Promote Town Centres as this reduces traffic.

Q9: No.

Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Other - A Tourist Attraction: -

Q11: Houses: 3
Commercial / Industrial Buildings: 2
Nature Reserves / Wildlife: 3
Farmland: 3
Woodland: 2
Degraded / Derelict / Waste Land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 3
Other - Historic Buildings including Church: 2

Q12: No.

Q13: Health provision.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11890

Received: 20/04/2015

Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd

Agent: Barton Willmore

Representation Summary:

Other factors, including access to public transport, services and facilities will need to be considered.

Full text:

See three attached documents.

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11915

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Karen Powell

Representation Summary:

Yes. This would not be met in the Doddinghurst site as the restricted access to Brentwood itself is quite a serious issue for several months of the year with a winding lane that has numerous accidents at this time of year.

Full text:

see attached.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11928

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Peter Robinson

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11949

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs N. Blake

Representation Summary:

Yes, site 101A on the M25/ A127 juction seems ideally suited to light industry/ retail use as good access to transport is essential, keeping heavy lorries off minor roads - which are already in a poor state of repair with patched tarmac and potholes everywhere.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11962

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Lafferty

Representation Summary:

No. But If there are brownfield sites to develop, yes. Priority should be to extend existing business parks and office blocks wherevever possible

Full text:

see attached.

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 11976

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs Susan Webb

Representation Summary:

Yes. Any other approach leads to spoiling the character and the overloading of rural and minor roads. The main highways (A12 / A127 corridors) are also associated with the rail and bus links

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 12005

Received: 21/04/2015

Respondent: Mrs J.M. Wix

Representation Summary:

Yes and no.
Depends on how many local people will work there.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 12023

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs Vera Grigg

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

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.

Attachments: