See attached.

See attached.

See attached

Q1: No - The continual suggested large scale developments of predominantly greenbelt land is unacceptable. The small villages of Brentwood are historic and do not need developing into an inner city style extension of London.

Q2: No - The tone of wording used suggests small developments in villages with minimal use of Green Belt land, however, this does not match up with the proposed sites, with for example 028C and 192 large areas of Green Belt with thousands of proposed new houses. Your presenting of issues is done disingenuously.

Q3: Yes - Again to ref 028C and 192. An area of largely Green Belt land the size of Shenfield and Hutton combined put forward for development?! This is not 'allowing villages to grow to meet local need' it is turning rural environment into a large urban area. Villages aren't growing they are being absorbed into a new town.

Q4: A127 growth corridor. Largely due to the fact that there is only one settlement there however, again scale of development is key; adding another village the size of Ingrave is not unreasonable, creating a town the size of Shenfield is.

Q5: No - Releasing sites on the edges of urban areas and turning all the land between two towns into housing are two different things. I would say yes however, the developments being suggested are so large that they cannot be described as sites on urban edges but entire new towns. Again your presenting of the question is divisive and disingenuous.

Q6: Green field sites should not be used, that is the point of them being greenfield, they are natural land preserved; not for development. So brownfield sites only.

Q7: Yes - Which further supports my point that sites should be kept to a minimum in size; to reduce congestion on the current network.

Q8: Yes - But it is vital that we do not lose the historic look of our town centre or build in a way that does not fit with the aesthetic of the town.

Q9: Yes.

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

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

Q12: This question largely depends on what you mean by terms like 'Green Infrastructure'. Furthermore I would look at supporting and maintaining the historic villages in Brentwood and the infrastructure required.

Q13:
Education
Green Areas (Wildlife etc)
Healthcare
Historical Maintenance.

See attached.

Q3: Yes - I do not want housing on Creaseys Farm Hutton 028C, or 183 or 28A or 28B. I love the open land there to cycle on.

See attached.

see attached

Q3: The possible development of the land to the south of Rayleigh Road A129 between Haverings Grove and Church Lane Hutton and extending southwards to include Creasey's Farm poses problems. 028C and 192 refer.

Without knowledge of the size of such a development predictions are difficult. But this would mean a step in the "in filling" between Hutton and Billericay creating a virtual ribbon development, a retrograde step.

Any development would result in increased traffic on the A129 and especially through Shenfield which is very congested especially at peak times. The increased load on the public transport system i.e. the railway stations at both Shenfield and Billericay must result in increased parking demand. There would inevitably, given it's outstanding performance and reputation, be an increase in demand for places at St Martin's school and one only has to visit Hanging Hill Lane in peak times to see how bad it is as present. No doubt there would be assurances that the problem will be covered but from past experience one can only be apprehensive about that.

The other aspect of any development there is environmental.

One only has to be in Hall Green Lane on a sunny or just bright Sunday, be it winter or summer, to see many families of all ages walking or cycling up to the Blue Bell woods. But it is not just the woods they want to see it is the wonderful views across open country, the peacefulness (no traffic) young children can walk along safely and there is the friendly rapport between people that results. Where else in the area can you see such views with so few buildings and no traffic in sight? To lose all of that would be a shame on all of us.

I realise that you have the problem of finding land to provide homes for people and would not wish to be NIMBY.

Q4: Not really familiar with the area.

Q5: 2) With regard to the A12 proposal.

Presumably as the A12 is a Trunk Road and therefore the responsibility of the Dept. of Transport/ Highways Agency they would have the final say.

The possibility of a new junction or connection to the local highway network might not be viewed very favourably by them especially, if what I read in the local highway network might not be viewed very favourably by them especially, if what I read in the local press about the bad accident record on the A12 is true and the lack of spare capacity (talk of widening to dual 3 lanes). The use of land adjacent to Sawyers Hall Lane might be an alternative as would a link to the Brentwood Leisure Centre although of course there are a number of sports facilities on that side of the A12.

I regret that I seem to be rather negative about the Options and realise that you have a seemingly impossible task in pleasing everyone but please let the Creasey's Farm option "die the death".

Q6: Would always prefer brownfield sites.

Q7: I have underlined close. Should people live close to busy highways? Bearing in mind noise, pollution and road safety.

Q8: Yes - Absolutely.

Q12: Links to railway station, shopping, educational facilities, doctors surgeries, hospitals.

Q13: Really good schools for all age groups. Good medical facilities. Reliable and easy to use public transport (buses).

see attached

see attached

See attached.

Strategic Growth Options Plan (SGOP)

I am writing to comment on the proposed SGOP for Brentwood.

I have lived in the village of Ingrave for 53 years. During this time I have enjoyed countless walks in the fields and woods to the east of the A128 (NE, E and SE of the village). I am therefore very dismayed to see that all these areas appear to be under threat as part of the SGOP.

Whilst I am aware of the pressure that Central Government is (wrongly, I believe) putting on Brentwood Council, I strongly urge you to resist any development on this precious Green Belt land, which offers fresh air and quiet recreation for everyone in Ingrave and Herongate. These green areas are also valuable agricultural resources and should be protected under Green Belt legislation. I find it very difficult to believe that there aren't much more suitable places for housing developments in other parts of the County, not to mention large areas of the rest of the Country. England has become far too London and SE centred. This is not good in the long term.

In addition to the above, any development around the two villages would suffer badly from a lack of general amenities (e.g. transport, schools, doctors, etc.).

Re: Proposed building on Green Belt land.
I am writing to register the fact that I am opposed to any building on Green Belt land in Ingrave and Herongate. My reasons for doing so are environmental, not enough infrastructure, i.e. schooling doctors surgeries buses and shops, and also the extra traffic on the A128 which can now be dangerously busy.

Strategic Growth Options Plan (SGOP)

I write to comment on the SGOP for Brentwood. Our family moved to Ingrave 53 years ago and we have enjoyed the surrounding countryside during this time. The fields, woods and parks provide peaceful space away from towns and increasingly busy roads.

My understanding of the Green Belt legislation is that in 1957 the UK Government enshrined in law and promising that this green area surrounding London would be safeguarded as a valuable landscape and a national and historic environment.
I am very disturbed that pressure is being put upon Brentwood Borough Council to find land to build thousands more houses, and I urge Brentwood Council to resist any development on this precious Green Belt land. These green areas are also valuable agricultural resources and musty be protected under Green Belt legislation.

We are being pressured to increase housing in the South East and expand, and here in Herongate, Ingrave and West Horndon there are already inadequate amenities such as transport, schools, doctors etc. for the existing population. Surely the UK Government should be seeking land away from the crowded south east upon which to build further housing, plus the resulting infrastructure that will be required; and again, I urge Brentwood Borough Council to resist any development on our precious Green Belt land.

Because of my very long association with Hutton Preservation Society I have been asked by its secretary (there is no chairman at present) to give our views on this subject.

As longtime members of CPRE and the Metropolitan Green Belt we have fought strenuously over the years to keep this area of Hutton, with its conservation village, without undue building. We do recognise, however, the difficulties the Borough is under, we really have considered the matter impartially.

If Brentwood and Basildon can come to proper agreement, of the three difficult categories this Society feels that of the Dunton Garden Suburb must be the best. It presents so much the better facilities, despite the sad reduction in the Green Belt. There would be opportunity for a sustainable community. In our area we cannot see this happening without drastic change.

1) What prospect has ECC for upgrading the A129 say in the next decade? At times it is infinitely overcrowded, flooded in this area in three places and a source of several accidents. It cannot support heavy construction lorries and nor can the surrounding country lanes. Which are already suffering hugely? A dual carriageway?

2) Much of the suggested farmland has received from DEFRA considerable tax payers money in the form of single farm payments. This could be substantial consideration. It is by no means a huge brownfield site.

3) Like, sadly much of the borough, we have many historical associations, Roman coins, Saxon broaches, Tudor brick kiln and so on are all found along Church Lane, a very early settlement. It is a constant joy to its many walker as this Society has frequently been told. It has poor communal facilities however, no GPs, no immediate state schools, no late evening buses, no easy train service. Transport would need total revision (in this of course I refer only to the Hutton Preservation area). Also this too, this committee felt would apply to the scrubland and scenic villages of your third option, the most difficult and complex of them all.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to take part in the consultation. We have always been grateful to the Council for helping us to uphold the Green Belt over the years.

Consultation Questionnaire:

Q1: Yes - In a difficult situation they are the best choice.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Sadly ECC will have a restricted budget for many years. Can we manage transport difficulties to heavy materials needed for growth without maximum disturbance?

Q4: Dunton Garden Suburb.

Q5: Yes - I think needs must, but with care and reluctance.

Q6: Most definitely brownfield sites, even within the Green Belt.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes - With reservation and common sense.

Q9: No - We are very fortunate and have open space and it is much used.

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

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

Q12: Yes - This seems to me to be an exceedingly comprehensive review of a very complex subject. Most of us dislike change but the population pressures on this area and political influence have forced it on us.

Q13: Alas, road structure in my corridor at least coupled with transport in general of which Crossrail is going to be a future unknown entity, both good and bad. And health facilities of all kinds are already a problem with an already exploding population.

see attached

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.

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.

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.

See attached

RESPONSE MADE VIA OBJECTIVE CONSULTATION PORTAL TO DUNTON GARDEN SUBURB CONSULTATION

Following an Extraordinary Meeting organised by my local Herongate & Ingrave Parish Council on Wednesday 11th March 2015, I would like to advise Brentwood Borough Council that I do not wish to see the council build 6300 houses before 2030 on any greenbelt land within the borough. Brownfield sites should always be the first option.

I would also like to advise the council that I am extremely disappointed that they have failed to formally notify me of any consultation periods regarding the above that ended on 17th February 2015 or for Dunton Garden Suburb that ends 16th March 2015. I have not received any letters from the council on this matter.

I first read about Dunton Garden Suburb in the Brentwood Gazette at the beginning of the year. The first I heard of any possible development between Running Waters and the Billericay Road, Herongate Tye was when my local parish councillor delivered the Herongate & Ingrave Newsletter on 14th February 2015. This was 3 full days before the consultation period ended, hardly enough time to understand and respond to the council.

I feel that as an Ingrave resident for the last 28 years that the possible development on land to the east of Ingrave and Herongate will have a dramatic affect on the wonderful countryside we enjoy as residents in Ingrave and Herongate. Also the A127 and the A128 in their current form especially the A128 that runs through both villages could not cope with such large scale development, the A128 struggles now with traffic during peak hours. Any extra volume of traffic running through both villages will add danger to residents, even more so with Ingrave Johnstone School located on the A128.

I would like the council to take my views into consideration and have the courtesy to formally notify me of any on-going devolvement's that may have an impact on greenbelt land in Brentwood, and in particular within the boundaries of the parish of Ingrave & Herongate.