The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

Remove Priests Lane from plan

The evidence base is flawed:
The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane, and was taken at a time which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done on Priests Lane.
The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
The plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane and Bishop Walk are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road designs are dangerous for increased traffic movements.
The site does not meet relevant sustainability conditions, notable access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
The Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has now become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width. This is the same with Bishop Walk.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but also traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GP's per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.

Remove Priests Lane from plan

The evidence base is flawed:
The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane, and was taken at a time which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done on Priests Lane.
The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
The plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane and Bishop Walk are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road designs are dangerous for increased traffic movements.
The site does not meet relevant sustainability conditions, notable access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
The Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has now become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width. This is the same with Bishop Walk.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but also traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GP's per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.

Remove Priests Lane from plan

The evidence base is flawed:
The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane, and was taken at a time which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done on Priests Lane.
The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
The plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane and Bishop Walk are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road designs are dangerous for increased traffic movements.
The site does not meet relevant sustainability conditions, notable access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
The Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has now become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width. This is the same with Bishop Walk.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but also traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GP's per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

Remove Priests Lane from plan

I object to the inclusion of the Priests Lane site in the Local Development Plan for several reasons most significantly road safety, traffic congestion, air pollution, site access and the loss of a Protected Urban Space.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

-The Plan is unsound on the basis that the evidence base is flawed.
The Transport Assessment is not accurate as it does not include all the traffic along Priests Lane and was undertaken at times that did not include all the school traffic even though the Council had said that a traffic assessment would be undertaken for Priests Lane.
-In addition the Transport Assessment does not take into account the increased use of Priests Lane for traffic travelling to the A127 that would be generated by an additional 1,000 houses in Shenfield nor any impact of the Elizabeth Line.
-The safety of the residents is not addresses; the proposed new accesses on Priests Lane are hazardous and the road design is dangerous in the context of an increase in traffic movements. The pavement is already far too narrow and in only on one side of the road in a number of places.
-Relevant sustainability conditions are not met in particular access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services, unacceptable effect on health as a result of increased pollution.
-Sites on Priests Lane have been rejected previously as the land was deemed to be valuable open urban space.
-The junction of Priest Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is already a pollution hotspot and pollution there will increase.
-The Lane was not intended to be a distributory road; residents have pointed out failure to comply with Essex design guides re road and pavement width.
-NPPF Compliant: Local Plans should address healthcare and education needs as well as housing and traffic concerns.
-No mitigation options have been identified as regards traffic in the context of the sustainability review.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
-Considered against reasonable alternatives the sites cannot be deemed to be justified and there is no reference to enhancement of infrastructure.
There is no provision for increased health and educational needs. There is already a low level of GPs per head and the Hogarth expansion was to meet current needs not further increased needs as a result of additional housing. Attendance at schools further away would require car journeys to attend making the traffic situation even worse.
The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

-The Plan is unsound on the basis that the evidence base is flawed.
The Transport Assessment is not accurate as it does not include all the traffic along Priests Lane and was undertaken at times that did not include all the school traffic even though the Council had said that a traffic assessment would be undertaken for Priests Lane.
-In addition the Transport Assessment does not take into account the increased use of Priests Lane for traffic travelling to the A127 that would be generated by an additional 1,000 houses in Shenfield nor any impact of the Elizabeth Line.
-The safety of the residents is not addresses; the proposed new accesses on Priests Lane are hazardous and the road design is dangerous in the context of an increase in traffic movements. The pavement is already far too narrow and in only on one side of the road in a number of places.
-Relevant sustainability conditions are not met in particular access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services, unacceptable effect on health as a result of increased pollution.
-Sites on Priests Lane have been rejected previously as the land was deemed to be valuable open urban space.
-The junction of Priest Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is already a pollution hotspot and pollution there will increase.
-The Lane was not intended to be a distributory road; residents have pointed out failure to comply with Essex design guides re road and pavement width.
-NPPF Compliant: Local Plans should address healthcare and education needs as well as housing and traffic concerns.
-No mitigation options have been identified as regards traffic in the context of the sustainability review.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
-Considered against reasonable alternatives the sites cannot be deemed to be justified and there is no reference to enhancement of infrastructure.
There is no provision for increased health and educational needs. There is already a low level of GPs per head and the Hogarth expansion was to meet current needs not further increased needs as a result of additional housing. Attendance at schools further away would require car journeys to attend making the traffic situation even worse.
The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

-The Plan is unsound on the basis that the evidence base is flawed.
The Transport Assessment is not accurate as it does not include all the traffic along Priests Lane and was undertaken at times that did not include all the school traffic even though the Council had said that a traffic assessment would be undertaken for Priests Lane.
-In addition the Transport Assessment does not take into account the increased use of Priests Lane for traffic travelling to the A127 that would be generated by an additional 1,000 houses in Shenfield nor any impact of the Elizabeth Line.
-The safety of the residents is not addresses; the proposed new accesses on Priests Lane are hazardous and the road design is dangerous in the context of an increase in traffic movements. The pavement is already far too narrow and in only on one side of the road in a number of places.
-Relevant sustainability conditions are not met in particular access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services, unacceptable effect on health as a result of increased pollution.
-Sites on Priests Lane have been rejected previously as the land was deemed to be valuable open urban space.
-The junction of Priest Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is already a pollution hotspot and pollution there will increase.
-The Lane was not intended to be a distributory road; residents have pointed out failure to comply with Essex design guides re road and pavement width.
-NPPF Compliant: Local Plans should address healthcare and education needs as well as housing and traffic concerns.
-No mitigation options have been identified as regards traffic in the context of the sustainability review.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
-Considered against reasonable alternatives the sites cannot be deemed to be justified and there is no reference to enhancement of infrastructure.
There is no provision for increased health and educational needs. There is already a low level of GPs per head and the Hogarth expansion was to meet current needs not further increased needs as a result of additional housing. Attendance at schools further away would require car journeys to attend making the traffic situation even worse.
The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

-The Plan is unsound on the basis that the evidence base is flawed.
The Transport Assessment is not accurate as it does not include all the traffic along Priests Lane and was undertaken at times that did not include all the school traffic even though the Council had said that a traffic assessment would be undertaken for Priests Lane.
-In addition the Transport Assessment does not take into account the increased use of Priests Lane for traffic travelling to the A127 that would be generated by an additional 1,000 houses in Shenfield nor any impact of the Elizabeth Line.
-The safety of the residents is not addresses; the proposed new accesses on Priests Lane are hazardous and the road design is dangerous in the context of an increase in traffic movements. The pavement is already far too narrow and in only on one side of the road in a number of places.
-Relevant sustainability conditions are not met in particular access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services, unacceptable effect on health as a result of increased pollution.
-Sites on Priests Lane have been rejected previously as the land was deemed to be valuable open urban space.
-The junction of Priest Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is already a pollution hotspot and pollution there will increase.
-The Lane was not intended to be a distributory road; residents have pointed out failure to comply with Essex design guides re road and pavement width.
-NPPF Compliant: Local Plans should address healthcare and education needs as well as housing and traffic concerns.
-No mitigation options have been identified as regards traffic in the context of the sustainability review.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
-Considered against reasonable alternatives the sites cannot be deemed to be justified and there is no reference to enhancement of infrastructure.
There is no provision for increased health and educational needs. There is already a low level of GPs per head and the Hogarth expansion was to meet current needs not further increased needs as a result of additional housing. Attendance at schools further away would require car journeys to attend making the traffic situation even worse.
The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

-The Plan is unsound on the basis that the evidence base is flawed.
The Transport Assessment is not accurate as it does not include all the traffic along Priests Lane and was undertaken at times that did not include all the school traffic even though the Council had said that a traffic assessment would be undertaken for Priests Lane.
-In addition the Transport Assessment does not take into account the increased use of Priests Lane for traffic travelling to the A127 that would be generated by an additional 1,000 houses in Shenfield nor any impact of the Elizabeth Line.
-The safety of the residents is not addresses; the proposed new accesses on Priests Lane are hazardous and the road design is dangerous in the context of an increase in traffic movements. The pavement is already far too narrow and in only on one side of the road in a number of places.
-Relevant sustainability conditions are not met in particular access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services, unacceptable effect on health as a result of increased pollution.
-Sites on Priests Lane have been rejected previously as the land was deemed to be valuable open urban space.
-The junction of Priest Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is already a pollution hotspot and pollution there will increase.
-The Lane was not intended to be a distributory road; residents have pointed out failure to comply with Essex design guides re road and pavement width.
-NPPF Compliant: Local Plans should address healthcare and education needs as well as housing and traffic concerns.
-No mitigation options have been identified as regards traffic in the context of the sustainability review.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
-Considered against reasonable alternatives the sites cannot be deemed to be justified and there is no reference to enhancement of infrastructure.
There is no provision for increased health and educational needs. There is already a low level of GPs per head and the Hogarth expansion was to meet current needs not further increased needs as a result of additional housing. Attendance at schools further away would require car journeys to attend making the traffic situation even worse.
The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

-The Plan is unsound on the basis that the evidence base is flawed.
The Transport Assessment is not accurate as it does not include all the traffic along Priests Lane and was undertaken at times that did not include all the school traffic even though the Council had said that a traffic assessment would be undertaken for Priests Lane.
-In addition the Transport Assessment does not take into account the increased use of Priests Lane for traffic travelling to the A127 that would be generated by an additional 1,000 houses in Shenfield nor any impact of the Elizabeth Line.
-The safety of the residents is not addresses; the proposed new accesses on Priests Lane are hazardous and the road design is dangerous in the context of an increase in traffic movements. The pavement is already far too narrow and in only on one side of the road in a number of places.
-Relevant sustainability conditions are not met in particular access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services, unacceptable effect on health as a result of increased pollution.
-Sites on Priests Lane have been rejected previously as the land was deemed to be valuable open urban space.
-The junction of Priest Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is already a pollution hotspot and pollution there will increase.
-The Lane was not intended to be a distributory road; residents have pointed out failure to comply with Essex design guides re road and pavement width.
-NPPF Compliant: Local Plans should address healthcare and education needs as well as housing and traffic concerns.
-No mitigation options have been identified as regards traffic in the context of the sustainability review.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
-Considered against reasonable alternatives the sites cannot be deemed to be justified and there is no reference to enhancement of infrastructure.
There is no provision for increased health and educational needs. There is already a low level of GPs per head and the Hogarth expansion was to meet current needs not further increased needs as a result of additional housing. Attendance at schools further away would require car journeys to attend making the traffic situation even worse.
The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

-The Plan is unsound on the basis that the evidence base is flawed.
The Transport Assessment is not accurate as it does not include all the traffic along Priests Lane and was undertaken at times that did not include all the school traffic even though the Council had said that a traffic assessment would be undertaken for Priests Lane.
-In addition the Transport Assessment does not take into account the increased use of Priests Lane for traffic travelling to the A127 that would be generated by an additional 1,000 houses in Shenfield nor any impact of the Elizabeth Line.
-The safety of the residents is not addresses; the proposed new accesses on Priests Lane are hazardous and the road design is dangerous in the context of an increase in traffic movements. The pavement is already far too narrow and in only on one side of the road in a number of places.
-Relevant sustainability conditions are not met in particular access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services, unacceptable effect on health as a result of increased pollution.
-Sites on Priests Lane have been rejected previously as the land was deemed to be valuable open urban space.
-The junction of Priest Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is already a pollution hotspot and pollution there will increase.
-The Lane was not intended to be a distributory road; residents have pointed out failure to comply with Essex design guides re road and pavement width.
-NPPF Compliant: Local Plans should address healthcare and education needs as well as housing and traffic concerns.
-No mitigation options have been identified as regards traffic in the context of the sustainability review.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
-Considered against reasonable alternatives the sites cannot be deemed to be justified and there is no reference to enhancement of infrastructure.
There is no provision for increased health and educational needs. There is already a low level of GPs per head and the Hogarth expansion was to meet current needs not further increased needs as a result of additional housing. Attendance at schools further away would require car journeys to attend making the traffic situation even worse.
The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

-The Plan is unsound on the basis that the evidence base is flawed.
The Transport Assessment is not accurate as it does not include all the traffic along Priests Lane and was undertaken at times that did not include all the school traffic even though the Council had said that a traffic assessment would be undertaken for Priests Lane.
-In addition the Transport Assessment does not take into account the increased use of Priests Lane for traffic travelling to the A127 that would be generated by an additional 1,000 houses in Shenfield nor any impact of the Elizabeth Line.
-The safety of the residents is not addresses; the proposed new accesses on Priests Lane are hazardous and the road design is dangerous in the context of an increase in traffic movements. The pavement is already far too narrow and in only on one side of the road in a number of places.
-Relevant sustainability conditions are not met in particular access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services, unacceptable effect on health as a result of increased pollution.
-Sites on Priests Lane have been rejected previously as the land was deemed to be valuable open urban space.
-The junction of Priest Lane and Middleton Hall Lane is already a pollution hotspot and pollution there will increase.
-The Lane was not intended to be a distributory road; residents have pointed out failure to comply with Essex design guides re road and pavement width.
-NPPF Compliant: Local Plans should address healthcare and education needs as well as housing and traffic concerns.
-No mitigation options have been identified as regards traffic in the context of the sustainability review.
No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
-Considered against reasonable alternatives the sites cannot be deemed to be justified and there is no reference to enhancement of infrastructure.
There is no provision for increased health and educational needs. There is already a low level of GPs per head and the Hogarth expansion was to meet current needs not further increased needs as a result of additional housing. Attendance at schools further away would require car journeys to attend making the traffic situation even worse.
The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: I consider the plan to be unsound as the evidence base if flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.

NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: The evidence base is flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.
NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: The evidence base is flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.
NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.

The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan.

Unsound: The evidence base is flawed.
* The Transport Assessment is inaccurate as it has excluded traffic along Priests Lane and was taken at times which excluded a large proportion of school traffic, despite Council assurances that a traffic assessment would be done for Priests Lane.
* The Transport Assessment does not account for the increased usage of Priests Lane from the proposed development of 1,000 houses in Shenfield travelling to the A127, nor does it account for the impact of the Elizabeth Line.
* The Plan fails to address safety of residents: the technical submissions of residents that new road accesses along Priests Lane are hazardous have not been addressed, nor concerns that the road design is dangerous for increased traffic movements.
* The site does not met relevant sustainability conditions, notably access, transport network, mitigation of impact on local services and unacceptable effect on health due to increased pollution.
* The Priests Lane sites have been rejected previously because the land was deemed a valuable open urban space.
* No account has been made of the increased pollution along Middleton Hall Lane and Priests Lane, the junction of which is a pollution hotspot.
* Priests Lane was never meant to be a main distributary road which it has not become. Residents have pointed out that as such it does not comply with the Essex design guide with respect to road and pavement width.
NPPF Compliant: Local plans should address not only housing but traffic concerns, healthcare and education needs.
* The sustainability review refers to traffic as a concern, but no mitigation options have been identified.
* No specific or robust argument has been made that a viable access point is possible.
* When considered against reasonable alternatives these sites cannot be deemed justified and there is nowhere in the plan which allows for the enhancement of infrastructure as a result of development.
* There is no additional provision for increased educational and health needs, the expansion of Hogarth School is to meet current demands and there is already a low level of GPs per head. Schools further afield which may have space will require a car journey to attend, exacerbating the already dire traffic situation.
* The land at Priests Lane should be removed from the Local Development Plan as I do not consider the Local Plan to be sound or legally compliant.