I am writing about Brentwood Council's planning policy to inform you that I fully endorse Professor T.A. Acton's response to DM28 and in particular section C. and especially the comments relating to Cottage Gardens, Beads Hall Lane.
I will be following the council's forthcoming consultation report to DM28 with interest.

I am writing about Brentwood Council's planning policy to inform you that I fully endorse Professor T.A. Acton's response to DM28 and in particular section C. and especially the comments relating to Cottage Gardens, Beads Hall Lane.
I will be following the council's forthcoming consultation report to DM28 with interest.

See attachment

See attached

AGREE TO DEVOLPMENTS IN THESE AREAS BELOW

Area 126 - East of West Horndon, South of Station Road to A128 (Note that this area was also set for development in the 1950's with plans for residential and roads) This could result in approximately 100 properties
Area 038 - East of Thorndon Ave, North of Station Road. (This area had development plans for residential and roads in the 1950's) This could result in approximately 100 properties
Area 048 - Elliots at junction of A127 and A128 including South towards Station Road (Area 038) This could result in approximately 500 properties
Area - East of A128 towards Laindon including Timmermans Garden Centre (who wants to move) and South towards Dunton Hills Golf Course. This could result in approximately 200 properties


AGAINST DEVELOPENT IN THESE AREAS BELOW
Area 020 & 021 - West Horndon Industrial Park and Childerditch Industrial Park (Wolsey Site) consists of small Industrial units. However TNT & other companies who use Station Road for their 40 ton lorries should be encouraged to move to Brentwood Enterprise Park at Junction 28 of the M25, South of the A127
Some employers should be allowed to stay because if the sites were to be ONLY residential, this would remove employment opportunities within the local West Horndon area.

Area 037 - Nutty's Farm (Green Belt) 1000 residential properties. Why not 500, why not 5000. The area concerned is farmland so ANY NUMBER OF RESIDENCES COULD BE BUILT. This area goes against a policy on Page 46/7 as follows: This development will cause MAJOR changes.

The general extent of the Green Belt across the Borough will be retained subject to minor allocations. The following settlements are excluded from the Green Belt as identified on the Policies Map:

Blackmore, Brentwood, Doddinghurst, Herongate, Hook End, Ingatestone, Ingrave, Kelvedon Hatch, Mountnessing, Stondon Massey, West Horndon and Wyatts Green.

SECTION on Page 145 - 14 Gypsy and Traveller Sites are to be located in West Horndon area. This contravenes all parts below:-

a. The site does not give rise to unacceptable harm to the Green Belt - It will affect the Green Belt!
b. The site is well related to existing communities and accessible to local services and facilities, such as shops, primary and secondary schools, healthcare and public transport - Wrong! The West Horndon School is full & has a waiting list. The Doctor at present cannot give enough appointments. Public transport buses to Brentwood is a joke. Access to A127 & A128 at peak times is terrible and cause major delays almost every day
c. The site is serviced by a suitable access road - Where is this access road? Why not build a new access road from A127 to West Horndon Industrial Park to alleviate the heavy lorries. Because it is too expensive!
d. The location would not result in unacceptable living conditions for its occupants - Wrong!
e. The proposed accommodation would not harm the character and/or appearance of the area and/or result in unacceptable visual impact - Wrong!
f. The site is located, designed and landscaped to minimise any impact on the environment - Wrong!!

I conducted a survey 6 years ago with the travellers when they were adjacent to South Essex Golf Course just North of the A127 and East of A128. They did not want to be in West Horndon! Also a major clear up expense occurred after they were evicted. So much for NO UNACCEPTABLE CONDITIONS.

FLOODING - Page 164 of the Report is unacceptable because:-
4.160 Brentwood Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA, 2010) maps flood risk zones in the Borough, with surface water flooding shown most notably on the A12 North West of Brentwood and on roads around Ingatestone. Incidences of fluvial (river) flooding are recorded along the eastern boundary of the River Wid and from Stondon Hall Brook and the River Roding to the North of the Borough. Areas at risk of fluvial flooding in the Borough are mainly rural, and include low lying areas south of the A127 west and east of West Horndon

Development of the areas 037, 038, 048 and 126 in the Report MUST be flood plain areas at present in view of the 3 major floodings that have occurred over the years. What proposals are there to deal with this problem?

Lastly, there is a proposed bus route along Thorndon Avenue out onto the A127 to the new Brentwood Enterprise Park at Junction 28 of the M25, South of the A127 and to the Codham Hall Industrial Park.

A BUS COULD NOT PULL OUT ONTO THE A127 AT ANYTIME OF DAY! IT WOULD BE DANGEROUS ESPECIALLY IN RUSH HOURS. I presume nobody actually looked at this scheme to aid the move of the West Horndon Industrial Park.

Overall there are some areas that are good for residential homes but flood schemes must be done before the development takes place

Alternative areas should be considered for Major developments include Shenfield (because of Cross Rail) and all the advantages that this super rail link would bring. Also house prices in this area would probably increase if the correct type of residences was built. Also Ingatestone and Mountnessing have good opportunities for residential housing.

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

1. Large scale development.
West Horndon currently has approximately 750 homes, this proposal will effectively treble the size of the village. It would therefore no longer be a village and its character and ethos will be lost and changed totally. We have chosen to live in West Horndon because of the type of village it is and this large scale development will completely ruin that and possibly reduce the value of the existing properties in the process.

The proposal to build a large estate behind existing properties will block views residents currently have and their outlook will just be over houses. There will consequently be a loss of large expanse of countryside and also we will lose the wide variety of wildlife that are currently seen in and around the village. We feel that no consideration has been given to wildlife issues.

We are being asked to comment on these proposals when there are no details for us to comment on, only boundaries and location of the proposed site and the number of homes it might contain.

2. Distribution of new homes throughout the Borough.
Looking at the distribution of the new homes for the Brentwood area it is obvious that the distribution is extremely unfair. Why are there so many new homes proposed for the south of the borough? There is no justification for such a large proportion of the allocation to be built at West Horndon. There must be other suitable areas e.g homes could be built on the Hutton industrial estate if that was moved as it is proposed to move the West Horndon industrial site. The Hutton site is near many facilities that are far better than the existing facilities in West Horndon e.g.shops, bus links and, Shenfield station with far more frequent trains.

3. Traffic problems.
The proposal is for 1500 new homes. Given that in general there are 1 or 2 vehicles per home this will mean an extra 2,000 vehicles going into and out of West Horndon. This will result in a higher volume of traffic going along Station Road and Thorndon Avenue. This will result in more traffic noise and pollution along both roads. It will also lead to queues of traffic trying to get onto the A127 and the A128 especially during the rush hour. The queues on the A128 may also cause problems on the flyover over the A127 causing further congestion. There is already a problem with speeding along Station Road and Thorndon Avenue and this will undoubtedly increase with all the extra vehicles. The council have not shown any evidence of plans to improve the roads to cope with the extra traffic.

4. Property values.
New properties that have been built in West Horndon in the last few years have taken a long time to be sold why do the council think that this will change? Especially as it is also proposed to have a 14 Traveller sites in or near to West Horndon. The reality is that if prospective buyers are considering a new property in West Horndon then as soon as they hear of the traveller proposal they will buy elsewhere. It is a fact that a Traveller site will reduce the value of properties in that area - as evidenced in Crays Hill where Basildon council has put properties in Crays Hill in a lower council tax band.

5.Medical facilities.
We cannot always get a doctors appointment on the same day now with 750 homes, how long will we have to wait if the planned development goes ahead? The Health Authority have no plans to increase our medical facilities if this development goes ahead.

6. Public transport.
Extra people will mean more commuters on the trains. c2c currently have no plans to increase the frequency of the trains or to increase the number of coaches during rush hour. The trains are already very crowded at rush hour so extra people will make the situation intolerable. Rail travel from West Horndon does not cater for journeys within the borough the stations either side of West Horndon are in different boroughs.

The bus service is very infrequent and does not run in the evenings. The lack of public transport to other parts of the borough mean that residents of West Horndon will have to rely on their own transport - thus creating extra traffic day and night. There are not many people that would be able to cycle all the way to Brentwood - even if a "Green route" is developed.

The Brentwood Local Plan justification for siting so many new homes at West Horndon is that it has "good road and rail access". This only applies for the current size of the village. If it is tripled in size then the road and rail access is inadequate and major investment would be need in both to bring them up to the standard required to provide an adequate service.

7. Loss of Green Belt.
The planned development is mainly on metropolitan green belt. This was originally set up by the government to expressly stop urban sprawl and keep land permanently open. As per the National Planning Policy Framework that states "exceptional circumstances must exist to justify loss of green belt" the government have recently stated that housing demand is unlikely to constitute exceptional circumstances.

8. Risk of flooding.
The planned development is on a flood plain - how can homes be built on such an area? Some residents have already been turned down by insurance companies because of the flooding only as recent as last Christmas. The village has been flooded in 1958, 1981 and 2012. There is no evidence that the council have carried out any assessment of drainage in the area. Even the Environment Agency's website shows West Horndon and Bulphan as being at risk if flooding. There are already problems with drainage, sewage how can extra homes be built without major improvements?

9. Local school.
The school is at full capacity. There will be no spaces at the local school for all the extra children.

10. Hospital facilities.
With so many new homes proposed in West Horndon and locally in Thurrock, Basildon hospital will not be able to cope with all the extra demands that will be placed on it. This will mean that people will have to travel further afield for treatment and other hospitals such as Queen's are struggling to cope with existing numbers of people that require treatment.


11. Crime.
Obviously with an increase in population, comes with it an increase in the crime rate, something which at the moment is low as per many VILLAGES. Also with the current economic climate it would be most unlikely that police resources could cope.

12. The Borough Council is expecting people to comment on a sketchy, poorly researched plan. It should therefore carry out a study of West Horndon focusing on infrastructure, services, amenities and public transport. Only after this has been done can it be said that the plan is responding to the needs of the local community. The local community has had little input into the plan. This is against the government guidelines of " Early and meaningful engagement and collaboration with neighbourhoods, local organisations and business is essential".

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

See attached

Stapleford Abbots Parish Council object to Policy DM28. We have been supporting Navestock PC as we are the bordering Village that is being destroyed by the current attitude to the Traveller settlements in this area.

Stapleford Abbotts is being totally surrounded by illegal settlements as Brentwood and Havering Councils are allowing settlements to go unchallenged and it appears that they are prepared to leave the sites as they are positioned to the extreme of the boroughs well away from the main towns (Brentwood and Romford).

It is noted that the Brentwood LDP presented at the recent Navestock meeting the councils figures for G&Ts are inaccurate and brings into question the professionalism of the document. We implore BBC to start reviewing this position urgently and with full commitment as at present it is causing no end of local problems and serious concerns espcially following the most recent violence.

See attached.