Question 9

Showing comments and forms 151 to 180 of 530

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 6960

Received: 10/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Michael Moss

Representation Summary:

No. Other than if the unsuitable sites suggested for development were earmarked instead for open space provision rather than development.

Full text:

I have tried to find the necessary questionnaire about the above mentioned subject but have been unable to access it. I wish to object most strongly to the proposals for a number of reasons, not least of which is that neither Lime Grove nor Peartree Lane are suitable for increased vehicular traffic either during or post development. This is a ridiculous proposal obviously put forward by and supported by those who have either no knowledge of the area or selfish interests or both. I wish to register my objections.

[Email: See attached]

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 6989

Received: 11/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs Kay Turner

Representation Summary:

There is a good provision of open space in my area and within the locality.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7003

Received: 11/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Colin Anderson

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7016

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Gill

Representation Summary:

No.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7030

Received: 11/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs Patricia Freeman

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7046

Received: 11/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Colin Holbrook

Representation Summary:

No. In the immediate vicinity there is a high proportion of open space as it is a village in the middle of a farming area.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7059

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr & Mrs A. Small

Representation Summary:

Yes. West Horndon's park would benefit from enhancements.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7092

Received: 12/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Lee Stiles

Representation Summary:

No.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7098

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Alan Smith

Representation Summary:

No The area is mosty surrounded by farms

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7111

Received: 12/03/2015

Respondent: Trevor Zucconi

Representation Summary:

Development of the local park area and furhter Land to the East, West and South [of West Horndon].

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7136

Received: 12/03/2015

Respondent: Mr. Norman Russell

Representation Summary:

No.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7143

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs Nicola McNicol

Representation Summary:

Yes. West Horndon village currently benefits from a small community park on Cadogan Avenue. As part of any potential future development within the village (and indeed, the Dunton Garden Suburb), there are significant opportunities to enhance this park, both from a facilities and access
perspective.The green belt was created to permanently protect area like Brentwood from urban sprawl. It
should be preserved and only enhanced to define new nature reserves protect wildlife effectively.Wildlife habitats that are protected by law can be found on all green belt land not just those designated as conservation areas or sites of special scientific interest. Any possibility of
development on green belt or other open spaces needs to be proceeded by a detailed environmental impact assessment

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7172

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Stephen Allpress

Representation Summary:

West Horndon village currently benefits from a small community park on
Cadogan Avenue. As part of any potential future development within the village
(and indeed, the Dunton Garden Suburb), there are significant opportunities to
enhance this park, both from a facilities and access perspective.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7216

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Frank Last

Representation Summary:

Yes.

Full text:

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes. Green Belt land should not be considered for development.

Q4: Any site that is considered for development should be looked at carefully as once it is built on it is lost as green space forever.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: Brownfield sites should be developed first. We must not keep losing greenfield sites.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes. By building retail parks away from existing town centres has a great affect on local shops and the lack of customers.

Q9: Yes.

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

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

Q12: Yes.

Q13: The repairing and maintenance of our existing road and keeping the Borough clean and tidy.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7229

Received: 06/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Arthur Birch

Representation Summary:

No. I think there is sufficient for the current village size.

Full text:

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Seems wrong to force on villages in Green Belt that struggle to cope with road, transport, communications as it currently stands.

Q4: Seems more logical to go where the capacity for growth in one area rather than several areas thus causing less disruption.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: Development of brownfield sites is preferable.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Not sure. The High Street is losing out to online retail. Are more retail sites necessary? There already seems a surplus of bars, eating establishments.

Q9: No. I think there is sufficient for the current village size.

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

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

Q12: No. Blackmore seems to accommodate barely its present requirements. Transport is rubbish.

Q13: Along the A127 or the A12.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7242

Received: 16/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs Jacqueline Owen

Representation Summary:

No comment made

Full text:

See attached document

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7256

Received: 16/03/2015

Respondent: Miss Lillie Hand

Representation Summary:

No comment made

Full text:

See attached document

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7276

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs Deidre Belton

Representation Summary:

No. Ingrave & Herongate are country villages and should remain so.

Full text:

Q1: No. I strongly object to any building on our countryside.

Q2: Neither. Do not know the issues raised in some areas.

Do not develop around Ingrave & Herongate.

Q3: Don't know. Leave Ingrave & Herongate out of the equation.

Q4: Anywhere but Ingrave & Herongate.

Q5: No. Leave our countryside alone.

Q6: Develop on brownfield sites only so long as it does not affect Ingrave & Herongate countryside.

Q7: No.

Q8: Don't know what this means.

Q9: No. Ingrave & Herongate are country villages and should remain so.

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: 4

Q12: It is difficult enough to obtain doctors appointments and other care facilities in this area without anymore rebuild.

Q13: No comment.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7288

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: Mrs Yvonne Savill

Representation Summary:

No. Much of the area around Ingrave is Green Belt which needs to be preserved.

Full text:

Q1: No. Green Belt land.

Q2: Yes. Green Belt land purchased by EU businesses for profiteering.

Q3: -

Q4: West Horndon industrial areas.

Q5: Yes. If not Green Belt.

Q6: Develop brownfield sites.

Q7: Yes. What future employment needs.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No. Much of the area around Ingrave is Green Belt which needs to be preserved.

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

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

Q12: No. See below [see answer to question 13: "Road, rail, water, sewage etc"]

Q13: Road, rail, water, sewage etc.

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7300

Received: 17/02/2015

Respondent: MR Richard Savill

Representation Summary:

No. Much of the area around Ingrave is Green Belt which I want to preserve.

Full text:

Q1: No. Green Belt land.

Q2: Yes. Green Belt land purchased by EU business' for pure profiteering.

Q3: -

Q4: West Horndon industrial area.

Q5: Yes. If not Green Belt.

Q6: Develop brownfield sites.

Q7: Yes. What future employment needs?

Q8: Yes.

Q9: No. Much of the area around Ingrave is Green Belt which I want to preserve.

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

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

Q12: No. See below [see answer to question 13: "Road, rail, water, sewage etc"]

Q13: Road, rail, water, sewage etc.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7309

Received: 16/03/2015

Respondent: Miss Helena Penkul

Representation Summary:

If you create a development as large as this proposal, there must be areas left as open and natural land. It is beautiful as it is.

Full text:

See attached document

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7321

Received: 16/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs June Harrington

Representation Summary:

If the plan is to use green belt but if the country is to be protected there isn't any space.

Full text:

See attached document

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7335

Received: 17/03/2015

Respondent: Mr George Hand

Representation Summary:

No comment made

Full text:

Please see attached document

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7349

Received: 17/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Lawrence Harrington

Representation Summary:

We must protect our green belt

Full text:

See attached document

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7369

Received: 17/03/2015

Respondent: Ms Tina Harrington

Representation Summary:

If the plan is to use greenbelt but if the country's ecosystem is to be protected then there isn't any space.

Full text:

See attached document

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7382

Received: 17/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Sydney Hunter

Representation Summary:

No comment made

Full text:

See attached document

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7398

Received: 17/03/2015

Respondent: Miss Pauline Fox

Representation Summary:

No comment made

Full text:

See attached document

Attachments:

Object

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7428

Received: 17/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Vincent Penkul

Representation Summary:

But please keep our rural village aspect by retaining our surrounding farmland.

Full text:

See attached document

Attachments:

Support

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7444

Received: 13/03/2015

Respondent: West Horndon Parish Council

Agent: SJK Planning

Representation Summary:

Yes. West Horndon village currently benefits from a small community park on Cadogan Avenue. As part of any potential future development within the village (and indeed, the Dunton Garden Suburb), there are significant opportunities to enhance this park, both from a facilities and access perspective.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments:

Comment

Strategic Growth Options

Representation ID: 7446

Received: 13/03/2015

Respondent: West Horndon Parish Council

Agent: SJK Planning

Representation Summary:

As part of any potential future development, the Dunton Garden Suburb, there are significant opportunities.

Full text:

See attached.

Attachments: