see attached

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached

Q1: Yes - However I am totally against the use of any Green Belt land.

Q2: No - The present A127 is inadequate for the volume of rush hour traffic as is the C2C service and parking at West Horndon station and you will remember we have had our flooding problems.

Q3: Yes - Why should the south side of Brentwood be singled out for expansion and not the A127 corridor?

Q4: I would like to point out that should the WH brownfield site be used for development the existing company (if moved) would find it very difficult to replace staff as many come by train.

Q5: I suggest they should be treated equally to the A127 corridor.

Q6: As commented earlier the Green Belt/ Greenfield sites were set to prevent urban sprawl.

Q7: Think this is covered by previous comments.

Q8: In the case of West Horndon, although Brentwood rate payers we have no reliable bus service and exorbitant parking charges in the Town Centre compared to parts of Havering.

Q9: No

Q10:
Scenic Beauty / Attractiveness: 3
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 3
Historic Interest: 3
Strategic road needs regular maintenance in view of its use: 4

Q11:
Houses: 4
Commercial / Industrial buildings: 3
Nature reserves / wildlife: 3
Farmland: 3
Woodland: 2
Degraded / Derelict / Waste land: 0
Infrastructure: 3
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 3
Other - School, church, village hall, doctors surgery: 4

Q12: The reasons of quality of life of a village be uppermost reason for their move here.

Q13: Expenditure essential if flooding and sewage are to be avoided with the increased housing along A127 corridor, the overcrowding of doctors surgery and the maintenance of the existing flood relief scheme.

See attached.

Q1: No - I agree there should be areas earmarked but not in the Blackmore village areas.

Q2: Yes - Apart from Blackmore.

Q3: The two sites in Blackmore are not suitable. i.e. Provisions of services. The sites are and make the village enclosed by nature and not a large volume of new houses.

Q5: No - Most of these areas are Green Belt hence I do not agree to accommodate.

Q6: Preferably Green Belt not on the area of villages.

Q7: Yes - But separate sites to villages and for school / medical to be more self contained. Water / sewage etc.

Q8: Yes - I agree that unused or not new sites in towns could contain more town accommodation.

Q9: No - A village is a special place to live, selected by people who want this environment. To provide open space will transform our village to town. The traveller have not been needed. This seems our land contribution.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty / Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Walking and Dog Walks: 5

Q11:
Houses: 3
Commercial / Industrial buildings: 1
Nature reserves / wildlife: 4
Farmland: 3
Woodland: 4
Degraded / Derelict / Waste land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure / Recreation Facilities: 2

Q12: No - What infrastructures / there are none in the 2x areas in Blackmore. These are farmlands with horses etc.

Q13: Don't understand the question.
I agree areas must be earmarked but I would like to see new small towns built. i.e. Harlow / Aylesbury etc. Not in rural villages which occupants settled expecting what they see/have. Not an overgrowth of people who could go elsewhere like NEW TOWNS. Very much against Blackmore considerations.

See attached.

See attached.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Infrastructure in north of borough suggests expansion there should be minimal.

Q4: Yes, but not exclusively. Those living in the south of borough should not face all expansion. Infrastructure here limited too.

Q5: Yes. The site at Mountnessing roundabout [site ref: 107] has been abandoned for a long time.

Q6: Brownfield sites first.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes - as long as parking needs are catered for. It's unrealistic to assume public transport is sufficient.

Q9: No.

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

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

Q12: Yes.

Q13: Roads to reduce traffic jams in Brentwood and Shenfield town centres at peak times - if those sites are selected for new homes.

Q1: Yes - These proposals are too complex for the layman to digest. My concern is the preservation of the village I have lived in for 47 years. Building on Green Belt will meet with most opposition.

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes - A large development with suitable infrastructure and good rail links to London and major towns give greater opportunity to those living on such a development.

Q4: Dunton - provided this site would meet all the requirement of a sustainable community, also least opposition to change would be experienced by the council.

Q5: Not in my backyard would be some of the opposition.

Q6: Any further development in villages will put extra pressure on transport - car use, schools, sewage and spoil the attraction of some very pretty villages. We are in danger of losing much of this "Green and Pleasant Land" in the name of progress.

Q7: Yes make most sense to reduce pollution and take into account the completion of cross link.

Q8: Yes - Brentwood has become to a greater extent fast food, coffee shops, restaurants and charity shops, a far cry from the 1950s. Parking becomes a bigger problem. A new town would take some of the pressure off.

Q9: No

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

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

Q12: Yes - More people commute wherever they live greater pollution with cars. Railways under pressure to deliver the best service it should provide. Parking at railways an increased problem.

Q13: Transportation - we are an overcrowded nation made worse by concentrations in overcrowded regions, the south east being particularly bad.

Q1: Yes - These proposals are too complex for the layman to digest. My concern is the preservation of the village I have lived in for 47 years. Building on Green Belt will meet with most opposition.

Q2: Yes

Q3: Yes - A large development with suitable infrastructure and good rail links to London and major towns give greater opportunity to those living on such a development.

Q4: Dunton - provided this site would meet all the requirement of a sustainable community, also least opposition to change would be experienced by the council.

Q5: Not in my backyard would be some of the opposition.

Q6: Any further development in villages will put extra pressure on transport - car use, schools, sewage and spoil the attraction of some very pretty villages. We are in danger of losing much of this "Green and Pleasant Land" in the name of progress.

Q7: Yes make most sense to reduce pollution and take into account the completion of cross link.

Q8: Yes - Brentwood has become to a greater extent fast food, coffee shops, restaurants and charity shops, a far cry from the 1950s. Parking becomes a bigger problem. A new town would take some of the pressure off.

Q9: No

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

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

Q12: Yes - More people commute wherever they live greater pollution with cars. Railways under pressure to deliver the best service it should provide. Parking at railways an increased problem.

Q13: Transportation - we are an overcrowded nation made worse by concentrations in overcrowded regions, the south east being particularly bad.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: No - Better transport connections such as a new A road could be incorporated into a development north of the borough. So this should be seen as a requirement of such a development not a disadvantage of it.

Q3: Yes - I think we should separate brownfield sites into disused or redundant industrial land whose development would improve the town's attractiveness and garden develop which would diminish the town.

Q4: Around West Horndon, south of the A127 so as to concentrate the development. Not have a large area partly developed and partly greenfield.

Q5: No - It would start eroding the separation between different communities e.g. Brentwood merging with M25, Shenfield starting to merge with Mountnessing.

Q6: Neither is sustainable over medium to long term, so I think the Council should be clearer about the sustainable growth that the borough can accommodate.

Q7: No - A12 and A127 are close to capacity at rush hour. There is a need for more transport capacity. It would be good if it was sustainable, but how?

Q8: No - The trend is towards local shopping as seen in developments by major supermarkets. It is probably more environmentally friendly to shop locally rather than in town centre.

Q9: Yes - The land/ woods north west of St Mary's school could be made into an urban park.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty/ Attractiveness: 4
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 3
Wildlife Interest: 2
Historic Interest: 2
Tranquility: 3

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

Q12: Rail link to London, Norwich and Southend. Not sure what % of people travelling out of Borough to work go by train, bus, A12 or A127.

Q13: Improved public transport and access.

Q1: No. The A12 Corridor seems to have been overlooked for development potential, and a large emphasis put on the A127 Corridor.

Q2: No. With the development of housing further down the A127 towards Southend, road and rail services are already running at capacity. Road noise now starts at 4am not 5am anymore.

Q3: To sustain even a moderate level of growth to West Horndon more upgrading of amenities would need to occur (i.e. schools, railway and dangerous junctions for a start).

Q4: Although Dunton Garden Suburb is a preferred location it seems there is a need to force a rail franchise to build a new station. Given the financial constraint on them I doubt this is possible.

Q5: Yes. As there are several hamlets to the north of Brentwood there could be gradual developments of these linking to Ongar Station and the A12 with new A-roads developed.

Q6: Brownfield sites are always preferable, but better access to the A416 and linking the hamlets would give a more sustainable solution and reduce impact on the community.

Q7: Yes. The road network to the A12 has to be developed.

Q8: Yes. Better transport networks need to be put in place to rural areas.

Q9: Yes. A footbridge across the A127 would greatly improve aces for families.

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

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

Q12: Yes. At present cars from Laindon, Basildon are parked in West Horndon Station which is at full capacity. The Garden Suburb could turn West Horndon into a massive car park.

Q13: Improved rail (the Council have no control over). Improved roads (the Council have no control over). Improved health (the Council have no control over). Improved schools (need new built to accommodate additions). Improved communications (at present no upgrade).

With Councils along the A127 Corridor having the same problems a solution to develop the A12 Corridor would seem a more sensible option, especially now with Crossrail development.

Q6: Develop brownfield sites and leave green areas alone.

Q12: Yes. There are no jobs for people in affordable housing plus there is no need for a playground as most residents are older.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - Green Belt land must be protected for once it is 'gone' it is never going to be reinstated for future generations. Implications for wildlife, quality of atmosphere, social cohesion.

Q4: Dunton.

Q5: Yes - But limited to prevent urban sprawl and reliance on one transport link which is already overloaded (A12).

Q6: Only develop brownfield sites despite objections from developers who 'moan' about its additional expense. Use smaller building firms (pref. local)

Q7: Yes

Q8: Yes

Q9: Yes - Open space = preserving the Green Belt.

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

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

Q12: North Brentwood's tendency to flood - the drainage / sewage question should be considered.

Q13: Free car parking for centres / retail regeneration. Faster more frequent bus services to relieve road congestion.

See attached.

Q1: I understand the need for new homes and feel that any building sites need the infrastructure to cope with new families in the village of Blackmore. There are no companies that could accommodate the new families.

Q2: The Dunton Suburb will have the infrastructure to cope with the needs of the new families. Regarding schools, travelling to and from work, shopping and leisure.

Q3: Yes - Blackmore village is unique in being a rural village the impact of over 100 homes is not going to help the local community in any way. The infrastructure of the village roads to accommodate the huge increase in vehicles will make the small roads very unsafe and dangerous. The local school would be unable to cope with the extra children and new families would be struggling to get to trains to travel to work. As there are not any jobs in our local community and as a village we just wouldn't be able to cope, the appropriateness of Blackmore village is nil.

Q4: At the Dunton Garden Suburb construction the new families will have a lot more freedom to choose schools for their children, access to shopping centres and leisure facilities, with more job opportunities. The infrastructure already being in place for families to travel.

Q5: As already stated new families moving into new areas need access to a variety of needs it depends on transportation to access their ability to do this.

Q6: No - Apart from losing our countryside which is very important new families would struggle without the infrastructure of new schools, bus services, leisure facilities and new job opportunities.

Q7: Yes - The infrastructure already being in place gives the new families greater flexibility in finding a job.

Q8: Yes - Retail development in town centres is very important, creating jobs and economic growth.

Q9: No - Blackmore village's open space provision is more than adequate allowing families to enjoy recreational activities.

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

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

Q12: No - Blackmore village would be left in a dilemma, the roads, local school and bus services to our nearest towns would cause chaos. 100 new homes could mean at least 300 people. There is no infrastructure in place to accommodate so many people.

Q13: When considering new houses for families to live, schools, shopping, leisure and recreational facilities with wide access to allow families to travel within easy reach on appropriate roads is very important in locating new jobs as well.

Q1: No.

Q2: No. See evidence on West Horndon. Very busy traffic already through West Horndon plus much flooding on roads and fields with heavy rain.

Q3: Yes. Housing future needs is a matter for the whole of Brentwood, not just the quiet small village of West Horndon. On moving here 57 years ago we had only a train and so set about getting built our church and village hall plus school, all we needed. Any other building would change West Horndon beyond recognition.

Q4: As far away as possible from the Green Belt of West Horndon.

Q5: As long as far away from West Horndon, which needs to remain as it is: a quiet village providing all we need.

Q6: Once you release Green Belt land any builders will have a precedent to keep appealing to build on the land.

Q7: No. It depends, there is plenty of employment already in the village.

Q8: No. No point if housing mainly south of the A127, unreliable bus service.

Q9: Don't know.

Q10: 10/10. We moved to the village for village life and being surrounded by Green Belt and its peacefulness 57 years ago.

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

We saved up our money to have built our village hall and church - village hall fully used 7 days a week for all the activities young and old need.

Q12: Yes. Quality of life in this beautiful, quiet village, we have all we need here, to which we moved to get away from busy, noisy towns and all the problems they bring.

Q13: A great deal of money spent across every category, green space, education, health facilities, transport and room for it, community facilities.

See attached

See attached

See attached

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes - Infrastructure important to cater for this growth, transport, schools etc Dunton provides good scope for this to be developed.

Q4: Dunton Garden Suburb.

Q5: Yes.

Q6: No, more built up urban areas will provide better sustainability and opportunity to grow a better community.

Q7: Yes - Transport links are important to a developed area.

Q8: Yes providing local job opportunities.

Q9: No - We enjoy the open space provision that we have within our area all of which are used fully by the community although no more council money to expend upon.

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

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

Q12: No.

Q13: Schools, hospitals/ doctors, transport, leisure.

Q1: No. Forced by central Government against the wishes of the consensus, but who cares about local democracy unless it suits.

Q2: Yes, if you mean people don't want or need these developments, only landowners and developers.

Q3: Yes. As always, we fill in the Green Belt when the more expensive brownfield sites are deliberately overlooked by developers because houses sell better in villages for higher prices.

Q4: What capacity? The road can't cope now but the developers won't have to worry about that as we will pay for upgrades by taxation.

Q5: No. More traffic, that's what we need on our already choked roads. How ridiculous.

Q6: Only brownfield sites.

Q7: Future employment needs? For who? How about building up north where jobs are really needed.

Q8: Yes.

Q9: Yes. We are already provided for very well as at the moment we live in a Green Belt village. For now.

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

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

Q12: The quality of life of people who have always lived in a rural environment and feel that this is the thin end of the wedge.

Q13: Railways.

Q1: Yes - We strongly oppose inappropriate development in the Green Belt except in exceptional circumstances where benefits clearly outweigh the harm and we also support the view that housing need alone does not constitute exceptional benefit.

Q2: No - Road, rail in the A127 corridor is already at capacity and the village of West Horndon is often used as a rat run. The A127 does on occasion get flooded and this can cause unnecessary flooding in the village.

Q3: Yes - The future housing need should be spread over the whole of Brentwood and appropriate transport and necessary infrastructure supplied.

Q4: We question the statement that the A127 has greater capacity than the A12. Should the Dunton site be chosen it would enable potential residential development in and around West Horndon village to be limited to the existing industrial brown field sites. Should any firm wish to move, given that staff are either local or come by train for those that actually own their own sites.

Q5: Yes - Brentwood Council should consider all sites.

Q6: This is just what the fraternity of builders want, once given you have set a precedent. Brownfield first please.

Q7: No - Not necessarily. The highway network will not be good if staff cannot get there and public transport is unavailable.

Q8: Yes - But regular and reliable public transport to all areas, including Dunton and West Horndon will be necessary to use it.

Q9: No - Already taken.

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

Q11:
Houses: 4
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 3
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 3
Farmland: 3
Woodland: 2
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 1
Infrastructure: 3
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 3
Other - Village Hall, Church, Scout Headquarters, School: 4

Q12: Yes - Quality of life.

Q13: Essential. Given the scale of the proposed development within the A127 corridor possible flooding will have to be taken into consideration and health, transport, green space and community facilities and education a priority.

Q1: Yes.

Q2: Yes.

Q3: Yes. Site 174 [Land South of Hook End Road, Doddinghurst] is a large site in a small area badly served by public transport facilities and would not sustain any significant growth.

Q4: Those in West Horndon and the proposed Dunton Garden Suburb.

Q5: Yes. In those areas where services and transport facilities can accommodate the growth by improvement.

Q6: Yes. Brownfield sites again where services and transport can accommodate the growth.

Q7: Yes.

Q8: Yes. The Town Centre is run down, has many closed shopping units and needs rejuvenation.

Q9: No.

Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 3
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 1
Tranquility: 5

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

Q12: Yes.

Q13: 1) Road improvements. 2) Drainage improvements. 3) Transport facilities.

Q1: No - We do not have the infrastructure i.e. schools/ health services/ transport/ water/ waste services

Q2: Do not understand the question! Which issues? Could not work it out from website.

Q3: Yes - They all will spoil the peaceful village and the reason I chose to live here. I wanted to be part of such a community and not a town.

Q4: I would prefer the A127 corridor as it has better access links with services and roads. Would prefer neither in reality.

Q5: Yes - As villages are rural and unique. If they grow they change identity from a village to a small town. This will be irreversible and change Britain.

Q6: Never good to release greenfield sites. They were protected for a reason. Not happy with brownfield sites either really. Not good places to build.

Q7: Yes - Need to be near major roads and railways.

Q8: Yes - Do not want village life to disappear for future generations.

Q9: No - Need to keep our green fields for recreation.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty/ Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 4
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Other - Part of Britains Heritage: 5

Q11:
Houses: 3
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 1
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 2
Other - Doctors/ Schools: 2

Q12: No - Lack of Doctors, room in schools, shops, small lanes, secondary schools are in Brentwood, time taken for fire/ police/ ambulance to reach the area. Lack of public transport. You have shut the library already! Water/ waste, lack of parking.

Q13: Retain our post office. Bring back the library ECC shut. Safeguard greenbelt for the next generation.

Q1: No infrastructure i.e. schools/ health services/ transport/ water/ waste/ roads/ shops.

Q2: Do not understand the question! Poor wording! Looked at web site consultation and still could not understand.

Q3: Yes - Will spoil the village/ community and reason I like living here. I chose this rural community as did not want to live in a town.

Q4: I would prefer new houses were built elsewhere such as A127 as it has better infrastructure and links to services and roads. However not in favour of this new building either.

Q5: Yes - Better to build there than in rural places such as Blackmore. Need to preserve the rural unique way of life. If we change to a town it will change community and a part of our heritage will go for future generations.

Q6: No to greenfield sites, they were intended to be protected for a reason. Nature will be endangered. Not happy with brownfield sites either not a good site for housing due to chemicals.

Q7: Yes - Need to be near major roads and railways.

Q8: Yes - Do not want village life community to disappear for future generations. This is not progress.

Q9: No - Need to keep our green fields natural and for recreation.

Q10:
Scenic Beauty/ Attractiveness: 5
Outdoor Recreation/ Leisure Use: 5
Wildlife Interest: 5
Historic Interest: 5
Tranquility: 5
Other - Part of Britains Heritage: 5

Q11:
Houses: 3
Commercial/ Industrial buildings: 1
Nature Reserves/ Wildlife: 4
Farmland: 4
Woodland: 4
Degraded/ Derelict/ Waste land: 1
Infrastructure: 2
Leisure/ Recreation Facilities: 2
Other - Doctors/ Schools: 2

Q12: No - Lack of Doctors, school places at primary and secondary schools are in Brentwood, time taken for fire/ police/ ambulance to reach the area. Lack of public transport. You have shut the library already! Water/ waste, lack of parking, small lanes.

Q13: Retain our post office. Bring back the library ECC shut. Safeguard greenbelt for the next generation.

Q1: Yes. Infrastructure is vital - roads and trains are at full capacity, more traffic, where will it go? Plus park for West Horndon station (this being full most days).

Q2: Understand the need for some housing development in West Horndon but consideration must be taken into account that West Horndon was mainly built on flood plain (hence the reason our houses had to be piled).

Q4: I have lived in West Horndon for 58 years and use of land for building purposes would definitely increase the flood risk (no one wants a home that has a high potential for flooding!)

Q5: No.

Q6: Develop brownfield sites as far as practical and maintain a reasonable size Green Belt all around the village of West Horndon.

Q7: No. Difficult question - new road structure seems to be inevitable - there are only so many vehicles can use a road at any time.

Q8: No.

Q9: No. One park used by children and adults.

Q10: Scenic Beauty Attractiveness: 3
Outdoor Recreation / Leisure Use: 4
Wildlife Interest: 3
Historic Interest: 3
Tranquility: 4
Other - A real close knit community: 5

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

Q12: Yes. Schools, medical practices, transport of all description.

Q13: A careful balance between the number of residential properties, job creations and again this word: transport.