First I have logged in and registered but was unable to find the link for submission to this plan and the helpline telephone number displayed in your system responded as un available, and when I telephoned the Council number and pushed various buttons for planning department I held on for 7 minutes and received no reply. So I have had to resort to this email rather than using the website for our submission

Please note my new address at XX from that given on my letter of submission dated 21st March 2016 a copy of which is attached.

Our concerns set out in the attached letter still subsist and the continued uncertainty does not assist the management of Bolsons Limited in planning the future development of the company and providing for additional employment. You will see that the Crossrail development in East London did considerable damage to Bolsons Limited, and the delay of over 6 years in finalising the protracted compensation claim was a major drain on management time and again caused unwarranted uncertainty.

My Manager attended the consultation meeting last Monday and inter alia gained the impression that the Brentwood Borough Council did not intend to exercise compulsory purchase powers and in particular to Unit 64 and other modern units at Hordon Industrial Park ,who as with Bolsons have 999 year leases. However I having been a Lawyer since 1961 and my late father ended his distinguished legal career at the Department of Environment- Land Commission having acted for a number of land owners in particular in the redevelopment of Milton Keynes, I am aware that policies are liable to change.

It is clear that the Council want to allocate the WHIE site for residential or residential-led development (see e.g. the Preferred Allocations doc at paras 116 and 129 and at p79). The high point seems to be at p79 where the site is proposed for residential with "potential retention of some employment..." . This is despite the fact that the document also emphasises the need for additional employment land to secure economic growth - see eg para 119. Again could you please elucidate?.

Interestingly, one of the key parts of the "evidence base" to justify the Plan (the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment - which should assess the merits of the site and its potential for housing and employment development) does not appear to have been finalised and published, so it does seem a bit cart before horse to be specifying Preferred Allocations. We therefore expect the Assessment may be available internally in draft to Officers and will doubtless reach a similar assessment. Please give some indication as to when this should become available to Bolsons?

We think therefore, there are two possible approaches (as previously) - (i) that Bolsons should oppose in principle on the basis that the site should remain solely in employment use, or (ii) that Bolsons should once the consultation process evolves make representations welcoming (or being neutral about) mixed use, provided we have comfort that the modern premises on the estate with long leases etc are part of the Council's vision and objectives for such future mixed residential and employment uses on the site. National policy is very supportive of mixed use development, and of sustainable development - in particular the opportunity to reduce car travel, so locating suitable employment close to residential we understand is a good thing. That said, the crucial matter that would need to be considered when masterplanning such a site would be what would constitute "suitable" employment in the circumstances, as the Council will need to conclude that some employment/industrial use would work - in terms of creating good residential amenity (avoiding new houses next to noisy industry etc).We submit that the current operation of Bolsons constitute such suitable employment and would contribute to the residential amenity.

We therefore refer you back to the representations made by Bolsons on the last occasion and emphasise the need for employment land and support for small, local businesses etc) and expressing neutrality/support for mixed use, and state that provided Bolsons are provided with enough information to conclude that Bolsons has a future as part of the brave new world and, absent such comfort, and once again express our opposition to the loss of employment land. We would therefore welcome an opportunity to speak to an officer in the Forward Planning/Strategic Planning team and ask them to provide information as to how the Council sees the future of the industrial uses on site. It may be that the ambition can be supported/ or at least something Bolson's could be neutral about, but we don't know enough now to be able to take a view (other than one of concern) at this stage.

We understand that the Government requires Plans should be realistic and deliverable - i.e. it is no good allocating land that cannot in reality be delivered because of constraints/ viability issues etc. And would therefore welcome your elucidation at an early opportunity.

We submit that the Council needs to explain how it proposes to deliver housing on the Estate, when there are X businesses or Y% of the Estate on long leases (and in modern buildings etc)., So it would enable to understand how the Council propose the allocation of the land for housing can actually be delivered, given that at least some of the Estate is held on long interests. If the Council are already thinking that the newer buildings on long leases could be designed into a masterplan of the site, then that would be some comfort if we were supplied with details as early as possible.

We reserve the right to submit further representations as when the consultation process develops.

2016 comments were attached.

First I have logged in and registered but was unable to find the link for submission to this plan and the helpline telephone number displayed in your system responded as un available, and when I telephoned the Council number and pushed various buttons for planning department I held on for 7 minutes and received no reply. So I have had to resort to this email rather than using the website for our submission

Please note my new address at XX from that given on my letter of submission dated 21st March 2016 a copy of which is attached.

Our concerns set out in the attached letter still subsist and the continued uncertainty does not assist the management of Bolsons Limited in planning the future development of the company and providing for additional employment. You will see that the Crossrail development in East London did considerable damage to Bolsons Limited, and the delay of over 6 years in finalising the protracted compensation claim was a major drain on management time and again caused unwarranted uncertainty.

My Manager attended the consultation meeting last Monday and inter alia gained the impression that the Brentwood Borough Council did not intend to exercise compulsory purchase powers and in particular to Unit 64 and other modern units at Hordon Industrial Park ,who as with Bolsons have 999 year leases. However I having been a Lawyer since 1961 and my late father ended his distinguished legal career at the Department of Environment- Land Commission having acted for a number of land owners in particular in the redevelopment of Milton Keynes, I am aware that policies are liable to change.

It is clear that the Council want to allocate the WHIE site for residential or residential-led development (see e.g. the Preferred Allocations doc at paras 116 and 129 and at p79). The high point seems to be at p79 where the site is proposed for residential with "potential retention of some employment..." . This is despite the fact that the document also emphasises the need for additional employment land to secure economic growth - see eg para 119. Again could you please elucidate?.

Interestingly, one of the key parts of the "evidence base" to justify the Plan (the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment - which should assess the merits of the site and its potential for housing and employment development) does not appear to have been finalised and published, so it does seem a bit cart before horse to be specifying Preferred Allocations. We therefore expect the Assessment may be available internally in draft to Officers and will doubtless reach a similar assessment. Please give some indication as to when this should become available to Bolsons?

We think therefore, there are two possible approaches (as previously) - (i) that Bolsons should oppose in principle on the basis that the site should remain solely in employment use, or (ii) that Bolsons should once the consultation process evolves make representations welcoming (or being neutral about) mixed use, provided we have comfort that the modern premises on the estate with long leases etc are part of the Council's vision and objectives for such future mixed residential and employment uses on the site. National policy is very supportive of mixed use development, and of sustainable development - in particular the opportunity to reduce car travel, so locating suitable employment close to residential we understand is a good thing. That said, the crucial matter that would need to be considered when masterplanning such a site would be what would constitute "suitable" employment in the circumstances, as the Council will need to conclude that some employment/industrial use would work - in terms of creating good residential amenity (avoiding new houses next to noisy industry etc).We submit that the current operation of Bolsons constitute such suitable employment and would contribute to the residential amenity.

We therefore refer you back to the representations made by Bolsons on the last occasion and emphasise the need for employment land and support for small, local businesses etc) and expressing neutrality/support for mixed use, and state that provided Bolsons are provided with enough information to conclude that Bolsons has a future as part of the brave new world and, absent such comfort, and once again express our opposition to the loss of employment land. We would therefore welcome an opportunity to speak to an officer in the Forward Planning/Strategic Planning team and ask them to provide information as to how the Council sees the future of the industrial uses on site. It may be that the ambition can be supported/ or at least something Bolson's could be neutral about, but we don't know enough now to be able to take a view (other than one of concern) at this stage.

We understand that the Government requires Plans should be realistic and deliverable - i.e. it is no good allocating land that cannot in reality be delivered because of constraints/ viability issues etc. And would therefore welcome your elucidation at an early opportunity.

We submit that the Council needs to explain how it proposes to deliver housing on the Estate, when there are X businesses or Y% of the Estate on long leases (and in modern buildings etc)., So it would enable to understand how the Council propose the allocation of the land for housing can actually be delivered, given that at least some of the Estate is held on long interests. If the Council are already thinking that the newer buildings on long leases could be designed into a masterplan of the site, then that would be some comfort if we were supplied with details as early as possible.

We reserve the right to submit further representations as when the consultation process develops.

2016 comments were attached.

First I have logged in and registered but was unable to find the link for submission to this plan and the helpline telephone number displayed in your system responded as un available, and when I telephoned the Council number and pushed various buttons for planning department I held on for 7 minutes and received no reply. So I have had to resort to this email rather than using the website for our submission

Please note my new address at XX from that given on my letter of submission dated 21st March 2016 a copy of which is attached.

Our concerns set out in the attached letter still subsist and the continued uncertainty does not assist the management of Bolsons Limited in planning the future development of the company and providing for additional employment. You will see that the Crossrail development in East London did considerable damage to Bolsons Limited, and the delay of over 6 years in finalising the protracted compensation claim was a major drain on management time and again caused unwarranted uncertainty.

My Manager attended the consultation meeting last Monday and inter alia gained the impression that the Brentwood Borough Council did not intend to exercise compulsory purchase powers and in particular to Unit 64 and other modern units at Hordon Industrial Park ,who as with Bolsons have 999 year leases. However I having been a Lawyer since 1961 and my late father ended his distinguished legal career at the Department of Environment- Land Commission having acted for a number of land owners in particular in the redevelopment of Milton Keynes, I am aware that policies are liable to change.

It is clear that the Council want to allocate the WHIE site for residential or residential-led development (see e.g. the Preferred Allocations doc at paras 116 and 129 and at p79). The high point seems to be at p79 where the site is proposed for residential with "potential retention of some employment..." . This is despite the fact that the document also emphasises the need for additional employment land to secure economic growth - see eg para 119. Again could you please elucidate?.

Interestingly, one of the key parts of the "evidence base" to justify the Plan (the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment - which should assess the merits of the site and its potential for housing and employment development) does not appear to have been finalised and published, so it does seem a bit cart before horse to be specifying Preferred Allocations. We therefore expect the Assessment may be available internally in draft to Officers and will doubtless reach a similar assessment. Please give some indication as to when this should become available to Bolsons?

We think therefore, there are two possible approaches (as previously) - (i) that Bolsons should oppose in principle on the basis that the site should remain solely in employment use, or (ii) that Bolsons should once the consultation process evolves make representations welcoming (or being neutral about) mixed use, provided we have comfort that the modern premises on the estate with long leases etc are part of the Council's vision and objectives for such future mixed residential and employment uses on the site. National policy is very supportive of mixed use development, and of sustainable development - in particular the opportunity to reduce car travel, so locating suitable employment close to residential we understand is a good thing. That said, the crucial matter that would need to be considered when masterplanning such a site would be what would constitute "suitable" employment in the circumstances, as the Council will need to conclude that some employment/industrial use would work - in terms of creating good residential amenity (avoiding new houses next to noisy industry etc).We submit that the current operation of Bolsons constitute such suitable employment and would contribute to the residential amenity.

We therefore refer you back to the representations made by Bolsons on the last occasion and emphasise the need for employment land and support for small, local businesses etc) and expressing neutrality/support for mixed use, and state that provided Bolsons are provided with enough information to conclude that Bolsons has a future as part of the brave new world and, absent such comfort, and once again express our opposition to the loss of employment land. We would therefore welcome an opportunity to speak to an officer in the Forward Planning/Strategic Planning team and ask them to provide information as to how the Council sees the future of the industrial uses on site. It may be that the ambition can be supported/ or at least something Bolson's could be neutral about, but we don't know enough now to be able to take a view (other than one of concern) at this stage.

We understand that the Government requires Plans should be realistic and deliverable - i.e. it is no good allocating land that cannot in reality be delivered because of constraints/ viability issues etc. And would therefore welcome your elucidation at an early opportunity.

We submit that the Council needs to explain how it proposes to deliver housing on the Estate, when there are X businesses or Y% of the Estate on long leases (and in modern buildings etc)., So it would enable to understand how the Council propose the allocation of the land for housing can actually be delivered, given that at least some of the Estate is held on long interests. If the Council are already thinking that the newer buildings on long leases could be designed into a masterplan of the site, then that would be some comfort if we were supplied with details as early as possible.

We reserve the right to submit further representations as when the consultation process develops.

2016 comments were attached.

First I have logged in and registered but was unable to find the link for submission to this plan and the helpline telephone number displayed in your system responded as un available, and when I telephoned the Council number and pushed various buttons for planning department I held on for 7 minutes and received no reply. So I have had to resort to this email rather than using the website for our submission

Please note my new address at XX from that given on my letter of submission dated 21st March 2016 a copy of which is attached.

Our concerns set out in the attached letter still subsist and the continued uncertainty does not assist the management of Bolsons Limited in planning the future development of the company and providing for additional employment. You will see that the Crossrail development in East London did considerable damage to Bolsons Limited, and the delay of over 6 years in finalising the protracted compensation claim was a major drain on management time and again caused unwarranted uncertainty.

My Manager attended the consultation meeting last Monday and inter alia gained the impression that the Brentwood Borough Council did not intend to exercise compulsory purchase powers and in particular to Unit 64 and other modern units at Hordon Industrial Park ,who as with Bolsons have 999 year leases. However I having been a Lawyer since 1961 and my late father ended his distinguished legal career at the Department of Environment- Land Commission having acted for a number of land owners in particular in the redevelopment of Milton Keynes, I am aware that policies are liable to change.

It is clear that the Council want to allocate the WHIE site for residential or residential-led development (see e.g. the Preferred Allocations doc at paras 116 and 129 and at p79). The high point seems to be at p79 where the site is proposed for residential with "potential retention of some employment..." . This is despite the fact that the document also emphasises the need for additional employment land to secure economic growth - see eg para 119. Again could you please elucidate?.

Interestingly, one of the key parts of the "evidence base" to justify the Plan (the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment - which should assess the merits of the site and its potential for housing and employment development) does not appear to have been finalised and published, so it does seem a bit cart before horse to be specifying Preferred Allocations. We therefore expect the Assessment may be available internally in draft to Officers and will doubtless reach a similar assessment. Please give some indication as to when this should become available to Bolsons?

We think therefore, there are two possible approaches (as previously) - (i) that Bolsons should oppose in principle on the basis that the site should remain solely in employment use, or (ii) that Bolsons should once the consultation process evolves make representations welcoming (or being neutral about) mixed use, provided we have comfort that the modern premises on the estate with long leases etc are part of the Council's vision and objectives for such future mixed residential and employment uses on the site. National policy is very supportive of mixed use development, and of sustainable development - in particular the opportunity to reduce car travel, so locating suitable employment close to residential we understand is a good thing. That said, the crucial matter that would need to be considered when masterplanning such a site would be what would constitute "suitable" employment in the circumstances, as the Council will need to conclude that some employment/industrial use would work - in terms of creating good residential amenity (avoiding new houses next to noisy industry etc).We submit that the current operation of Bolsons constitute such suitable employment and would contribute to the residential amenity.

We therefore refer you back to the representations made by Bolsons on the last occasion and emphasise the need for employment land and support for small, local businesses etc) and expressing neutrality/support for mixed use, and state that provided Bolsons are provided with enough information to conclude that Bolsons has a future as part of the brave new world and, absent such comfort, and once again express our opposition to the loss of employment land. We would therefore welcome an opportunity to speak to an officer in the Forward Planning/Strategic Planning team and ask them to provide information as to how the Council sees the future of the industrial uses on site. It may be that the ambition can be supported/ or at least something Bolson's could be neutral about, but we don't know enough now to be able to take a view (other than one of concern) at this stage.

We understand that the Government requires Plans should be realistic and deliverable - i.e. it is no good allocating land that cannot in reality be delivered because of constraints/ viability issues etc. And would therefore welcome your elucidation at an early opportunity.

We submit that the Council needs to explain how it proposes to deliver housing on the Estate, when there are X businesses or Y% of the Estate on long leases (and in modern buildings etc)., So it would enable to understand how the Council propose the allocation of the land for housing can actually be delivered, given that at least some of the Estate is held on long interests. If the Council are already thinking that the newer buildings on long leases could be designed into a masterplan of the site, then that would be some comfort if we were supplied with details as early as possible.

We reserve the right to submit further representations as when the consultation process develops.

2016 comments were attached.

First I have logged in and registered but was unable to find the link for submission to this plan and the helpline telephone number displayed in your system responded as un available, and when I telephoned the Council number and pushed various buttons for planning department I held on for 7 minutes and received no reply. So I have had to resort to this email rather than using the website for our submission

Please note my new address at XX from that given on my letter of submission dated 21st March 2016 a copy of which is attached.

Our concerns set out in the attached letter still subsist and the continued uncertainty does not assist the management of Bolsons Limited in planning the future development of the company and providing for additional employment. You will see that the Crossrail development in East London did considerable damage to Bolsons Limited, and the delay of over 6 years in finalising the protracted compensation claim was a major drain on management time and again caused unwarranted uncertainty.

My Manager attended the consultation meeting last Monday and inter alia gained the impression that the Brentwood Borough Council did not intend to exercise compulsory purchase powers and in particular to Unit 64 and other modern units at Hordon Industrial Park ,who as with Bolsons have 999 year leases. However I having been a Lawyer since 1961 and my late father ended his distinguished legal career at the Department of Environment- Land Commission having acted for a number of land owners in particular in the redevelopment of Milton Keynes, I am aware that policies are liable to change.

It is clear that the Council want to allocate the WHIE site for residential or residential-led development (see e.g. the Preferred Allocations doc at paras 116 and 129 and at p79). The high point seems to be at p79 where the site is proposed for residential with "potential retention of some employment..." . This is despite the fact that the document also emphasises the need for additional employment land to secure economic growth - see eg para 119. Again could you please elucidate?.

Interestingly, one of the key parts of the "evidence base" to justify the Plan (the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment - which should assess the merits of the site and its potential for housing and employment development) does not appear to have been finalised and published, so it does seem a bit cart before horse to be specifying Preferred Allocations. We therefore expect the Assessment may be available internally in draft to Officers and will doubtless reach a similar assessment. Please give some indication as to when this should become available to Bolsons?

We think therefore, there are two possible approaches (as previously) - (i) that Bolsons should oppose in principle on the basis that the site should remain solely in employment use, or (ii) that Bolsons should once the consultation process evolves make representations welcoming (or being neutral about) mixed use, provided we have comfort that the modern premises on the estate with long leases etc are part of the Council's vision and objectives for such future mixed residential and employment uses on the site. National policy is very supportive of mixed use development, and of sustainable development - in particular the opportunity to reduce car travel, so locating suitable employment close to residential we understand is a good thing. That said, the crucial matter that would need to be considered when masterplanning such a site would be what would constitute "suitable" employment in the circumstances, as the Council will need to conclude that some employment/industrial use would work - in terms of creating good residential amenity (avoiding new houses next to noisy industry etc).We submit that the current operation of Bolsons constitute such suitable employment and would contribute to the residential amenity.

We therefore refer you back to the representations made by Bolsons on the last occasion and emphasise the need for employment land and support for small, local businesses etc) and expressing neutrality/support for mixed use, and state that provided Bolsons are provided with enough information to conclude that Bolsons has a future as part of the brave new world and, absent such comfort, and once again express our opposition to the loss of employment land. We would therefore welcome an opportunity to speak to an officer in the Forward Planning/Strategic Planning team and ask them to provide information as to how the Council sees the future of the industrial uses on site. It may be that the ambition can be supported/ or at least something Bolson's could be neutral about, but we don't know enough now to be able to take a view (other than one of concern) at this stage.

We understand that the Government requires Plans should be realistic and deliverable - i.e. it is no good allocating land that cannot in reality be delivered because of constraints/ viability issues etc. And would therefore welcome your elucidation at an early opportunity.

We submit that the Council needs to explain how it proposes to deliver housing on the Estate, when there are X businesses or Y% of the Estate on long leases (and in modern buildings etc)., So it would enable to understand how the Council propose the allocation of the land for housing can actually be delivered, given that at least some of the Estate is held on long interests. If the Council are already thinking that the newer buildings on long leases could be designed into a masterplan of the site, then that would be some comfort if we were supplied with details as early as possible.

We reserve the right to submit further representations as when the consultation process develops.

2016 comments were attached.

First I have logged in and registered but was unable to find the link for submission to this plan and the helpline telephone number displayed in your system responded as un available, and when I telephoned the Council number and pushed various buttons for planning department I held on for 7 minutes and received no reply. So I have had to resort to this email rather than using the website for our submission

Please note my new address at XX from that given on my letter of submission dated 21st March 2016 a copy of which is attached.

Our concerns set out in the attached letter still subsist and the continued uncertainty does not assist the management of Bolsons Limited in planning the future development of the company and providing for additional employment. You will see that the Crossrail development in East London did considerable damage to Bolsons Limited, and the delay of over 6 years in finalising the protracted compensation claim was a major drain on management time and again caused unwarranted uncertainty.

My Manager attended the consultation meeting last Monday and inter alia gained the impression that the Brentwood Borough Council did not intend to exercise compulsory purchase powers and in particular to Unit 64 and other modern units at Hordon Industrial Park ,who as with Bolsons have 999 year leases. However I having been a Lawyer since 1961 and my late father ended his distinguished legal career at the Department of Environment- Land Commission having acted for a number of land owners in particular in the redevelopment of Milton Keynes, I am aware that policies are liable to change.

It is clear that the Council want to allocate the WHIE site for residential or residential-led development (see e.g. the Preferred Allocations doc at paras 116 and 129 and at p79). The high point seems to be at p79 where the site is proposed for residential with "potential retention of some employment..." . This is despite the fact that the document also emphasises the need for additional employment land to secure economic growth - see eg para 119. Again could you please elucidate?.

Interestingly, one of the key parts of the "evidence base" to justify the Plan (the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment - which should assess the merits of the site and its potential for housing and employment development) does not appear to have been finalised and published, so it does seem a bit cart before horse to be specifying Preferred Allocations. We therefore expect the Assessment may be available internally in draft to Officers and will doubtless reach a similar assessment. Please give some indication as to when this should become available to Bolsons?

We think therefore, there are two possible approaches (as previously) - (i) that Bolsons should oppose in principle on the basis that the site should remain solely in employment use, or (ii) that Bolsons should once the consultation process evolves make representations welcoming (or being neutral about) mixed use, provided we have comfort that the modern premises on the estate with long leases etc are part of the Council's vision and objectives for such future mixed residential and employment uses on the site. National policy is very supportive of mixed use development, and of sustainable development - in particular the opportunity to reduce car travel, so locating suitable employment close to residential we understand is a good thing. That said, the crucial matter that would need to be considered when masterplanning such a site would be what would constitute "suitable" employment in the circumstances, as the Council will need to conclude that some employment/industrial use would work - in terms of creating good residential amenity (avoiding new houses next to noisy industry etc).We submit that the current operation of Bolsons constitute such suitable employment and would contribute to the residential amenity.

We therefore refer you back to the representations made by Bolsons on the last occasion and emphasise the need for employment land and support for small, local businesses etc) and expressing neutrality/support for mixed use, and state that provided Bolsons are provided with enough information to conclude that Bolsons has a future as part of the brave new world and, absent such comfort, and once again express our opposition to the loss of employment land. We would therefore welcome an opportunity to speak to an officer in the Forward Planning/Strategic Planning team and ask them to provide information as to how the Council sees the future of the industrial uses on site. It may be that the ambition can be supported/ or at least something Bolson's could be neutral about, but we don't know enough now to be able to take a view (other than one of concern) at this stage.

We understand that the Government requires Plans should be realistic and deliverable - i.e. it is no good allocating land that cannot in reality be delivered because of constraints/ viability issues etc. And would therefore welcome your elucidation at an early opportunity.

We submit that the Council needs to explain how it proposes to deliver housing on the Estate, when there are X businesses or Y% of the Estate on long leases (and in modern buildings etc)., So it would enable to understand how the Council propose the allocation of the land for housing can actually be delivered, given that at least some of the Estate is held on long interests. If the Council are already thinking that the newer buildings on long leases could be designed into a masterplan of the site, then that would be some comfort if we were supplied with details as early as possible.

We reserve the right to submit further representations as when the consultation process develops.

2016 comments were attached.