Q1: No.

Q2: No.

Q3: No.

Q4: ?

Q5: No.

Q6: Should be left as Green Belt.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

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

Q11: ?

Q12: No.

Q13: ?

Q1: I strongly disagree with these proposals.

Q2: No. New houses needed but not this many.

Q3: Yes, not on Green Belt.

Q4: Warley, near Holly Trees.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: Brownfield only.

Q7: No.

Q8: No.

Q9: No. No brownfield here. Many elsewhere.

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

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

Q12: Drainage.

Q13: Roads. Maintaining housing, farmland, forests/trees.

Q1: No - It is important that Brentwood remains separate from London and the villages from Brentwood.

Q2: No.

Q3: Yes - Important farmland.

Q4: Not given at all.

Q6: Yes so long as they do not swamp us.

Q7: No - One does not follow from the other.

Q8: Yes - I would encourage the building of homes close to the High Street.

Q9: No - We have plenty and room for development within the village.

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

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

Q12: Brentwood has expanded massively since the war, Essex has also done more than its share.

Q1: No.

Q2: Yes.

Q4: None as the A127 and A128 is already too busy and the road is closed too often due to accidents.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: Green Belt shouldn't be used.

Q9: No.

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

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

Q12: Too many cars already using Brentwood Road with too many kids being knocked over due to too many cars speeding along this road.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached

Q1: As long as this is kept to a minimum.

Q4: None. A127 and A128 is already too busy.

Q5: No.

Q6: None of Green Belt used be used.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: Yes.

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

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

Q12: Already there is far too much traffic alone Brentwood between the A128 and Brentwood town.

Q1: No - We should only be using brownfield sites.

Q2: No - Not applicable.

Q3: No - N/A

Q5: No - There are enough brownfield sites and sites that builders and developers own and are sitting on.

Q6: Only brownfield sites.

Q7: No.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty: 5
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 4
Historic Interest: 3
Tranquility: 4
Other - No overdevelopment: 5

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

Q12: Doctors appointments, parking, policing, schooling all pushed to the limit.

Q13: All the above.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes - The north area of the Borough does not have adequate transport connections or other essential facilities to make the development of more than a very few new homes a feasible proposition.

Q3: See answer to Q2 above. (N.B. was unable to access details of planning applications for various particular sites listed in the consultation document online. Reference numbers, keywords or roads gave "No results found").

Q4: Because of the existing transport connections (A127); nature of terrain and capacity for growth, from the information provided, Dunton Garden Suburb would appear to be the most suitable site.

Q5: Yes - Again, because of transport connections, this would appear to make more sense than releasing sites on the edge of villages in more rural areas.

Q6: Preferable to develop brownfield rather than greenfield sites but any development of Green Belt should be minimised.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: Yes.

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

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

Consultation Comments:
1. With a consultation of this importance, it would have been better for Brentwood Council to have notified all residents direct, and with sufficient advance notice. Seemingly, many people across the Borough, have only become aware of it because their individual Parish Councils have notified them in the last 10 days or so.
2. Access to the relevant documents for those without internet facilities should be made easier, this form should only be filled in with reference to the complete consultation document which many will not have seen. Even using online sources, was far from straightforward to locate the appropriate/ latest documents or to complete the form.

See attached.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: No.

Q4: Dunton Garden Suburb.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: Brownfield sites only.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

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

Q11:
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4

Q12: Yes.

Q13: Better roads and crossings.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - Site ref 076 & 077 to much for village, school already full.

Q4: Yes.

Q5: Yes - Only brownfield sites.

Q6: Only brownfield sites.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

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

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

Q12: Yes.

Q13:
1. Using appropriate methods to remove unauthorised Traveller Sites.
2. Acquire as many unused/ empty houses. In Blackmore there are at least 6 empty houses.

Q1: No.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - The villages within the north of the borough i.e. Doddinghurst, should be left to retain its village status, where no new sites should be built.

Q4: A127 corridor.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: No. Why should these pretty villages be exploited when alternative sites are available with better infrastructure and services are available i.e. A127 corridor.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes - What is best for the Town and its residents must come first. Not overdeveloped by multi national companies. i.e. Tesco, Waitrose etc.

Q9: No - New builds would totally destroy the landscape and countryside of our village which is so important to families and the elderly in our village.

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

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

Q12: Yes - The tranquillity and natural beauty of the villages which is why residents love the "way of life".

Q13: Repair and renewal of road infrastructures around the fringes of Brentwood. Pot holes etc. Street lighting. CCTV introduction. Increased police visibility.

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 - Only in specific areas (contain). If villages continue to be built in/on they very quickly become towns spoiling infrastructure, wildlife habitat, increased noise levels etc.

Q4: Site 200 - The Dunton Garden Suburb. Great care would have to be taken re: the infrastructure, avoid flooding/access etc.

Q5: No - But must depend on the individual site.

Q6: This depends on the site BUT NOT in Green Belt bordering areas which include areas such as Stondon Massey, Blackmore, Doddinghurst etc.

Q7: No - Depends on the need for work, economic growth. Development should necessarily be because of highway network or other transport.

Q8: Yes - Villages and other rural communities must retain shops and post offices.

Q9: Yes - Agricultural land MUST be preservescome what may, public footpaths kept in good repair with easy access, lands such as those by Orchard Piece and Woolard Way converted into allotments and/or nature reserve.

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

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

Q12: Yes - Sort of but careful thought and consideration.

Q13: Road up keep, health provision - travel - blood tests, education, MUST maintain Green Belt and recreational facilities. See p31, section 6.9. Bus services (hence travel) must go to health providers/surgeries. Not everyone drives, older people like to retain independence therefore not relying on lifts all the time.

See attached

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

See attached.

Q1: Yes - Many areas are not properly finalised. See P6 of the consultation document where much information is stated as being "forthcoming". Therefore proper comment cannot be made on these at this stage.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - Dunton Garden Suburb should be supported to relieve housing pressure on Brentwood. Therefore site close to the A127 seem appropriate to be chosen for development.

Q4: 037A, 037B, 037C, 020, 021 and 200.

Q5: Yes - Providing proper and adequate access to the A12 is made. Otherwise Brentwood town centre will become more crowded.

Q6: No.

Q7: Yes - The highway network needs to be improved and properly maintained. This applies particularly to the rural roads which are currently breaking up at the edges because of big homes..

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No.

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

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

Q12: Yes - The roads in the area in which I live are inadequate and would be more so with further development, maintenance is very poor on rural roads with edges breaking down and frequent pot holes. These matters should be resolved before more development.

Q13: Roads - upgrading and maintenance.
Drainage - both surface water and sewage disposal.

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