See Attached

See Attached

I strongly object to the proposed plan to build 1500 homes in West Horndon. This would treble the size of the village and change the character of the whole area. Why are we getting nearly 50% (43%) of the total number of the houses in the whole of the borough and why is the north of the borough not getting any??

As we have a station I believe this so called plus for housing here but if some of the new people are supposed to work or spend in the borough this is not possible from West Horndon Station. The railway station provides a commuter route into London but has limited additional capacity. The railway does not cater for the important local journeys, such as into Brentwood it simply runs straight in and out of the Borough.It does not support travel within the Borough. As there is not a good bus service into Brentwood this is not feasible. Even if new bus services were introduced this would impact further on the A128 where current levels of traffic are already close to breaking point and the A127 which is at a standstill most mornings towards London with heavy traffic going towards Southend so any extra vehicles from the 1500 houses could seriously risk a grid lock situation unless the A127 could be widened at a massive cost.

We are also being asked to comment on a major proposal having been presented with only an outline of what is proposed. It is not known therefore what benefits,if any, there might be for the village, or how the scheme might seek to mitigate against the many harmful impacts. There is no question that a development of the scale proposed will greatly increase the volume of traffic passing through the village. Overall the concern is that the people of the local community are most likely to suffer the harmful impacts of the development by way of increased traffic, overlooked back gardens, loss of rural character, without any discernible benefits. There is no explanation why West Horndon, as a small village should accept a wholly disproportionate number of new homes.

With the council's track record of not repairing roads or pavements. (Many of the pavements are very dangerous to walk on) or of the reduced amenities we have in the village we are very suspicious of getting any infrastructure that will maintain this level of housing. The sewerage is at capacity and many people get blocked drains and sewage etc flowing out over their gardens, drives etc. The preferred options document makes reference to an evidence base and infrastructure but is only able to say that an "Infrastructure Delivery Plan is forthcoming" How can we comment on this? National guidance state that Local Planning Authorities should assess the quality and capacity of infrastructure, water supply, wastewater and its treatment, energy (including heat), telecommunications, utilities, health, social care, education, and flood risk and its ability to meet forecast demands. This has not been done.

There us no evidence that the council has undertaken a flood risk. The village flooded in 1958, 1981 and most recently in 2012. I believe that the green belt earmarked for some of the housing acts as drainage to stop the village from flooding and if built on will increase the risk to the village and I believe Bulphan. A further flood alleviation scheme will increase risk to the south of the railway line and also will incur massive costs. There will be a knock on effect.

Whether new development can be proved to be sustainable is central to planning policy. Is this proposal sustainable - ensuring that better lives for ourselves doesn't mean worse lives in the future generations. I believe an essential requirement is that new home owners will not be over dependent on the car for journeys to work, school, shops, leisure activities and other services and amenities and I believe that in West Horndon they would be wholly reliant on their cars. West Horndon is a small village of less than 1900 people with a very limited range of amenities and facilities. It has few shops, no secondary school and is remote from the larger centres of Brentwood, Basildon and Upminster. The primary school is at full capacity. There is a three day wait to see a doctor and there is an infrequent bus service.If residents of the new development have no choice but to make most journeys by car the village quite clearly does not offer a sustainable location. It is possible that improvements could be made to the infrastructure and public transport and new local facilities provided but given the major scale of the proposed development such measures will not overcome the fact that West Horndon is to a genuinely sustainable location.

West Horndon is a small lower density settlement surrounded by open countryside. The village is characterised by larger plots backing onto open fields. A wide variety of wildlife can be seen in and around the village. Birds such as the Dunnock, Thrush Finch, Nightingale, Skylark, Kestrel, Buzzard, Tawny Owl and so on. Butterflies such as Small Blue, Red Admiral, Wall Brown. The water Vole Great Crested Newts and Pipestrelle Bats. The construction of 1500 homes on the edge of the village, and the consequence loss of a large expanse of open countryside, will destroy its open setting and rural character. No consideration has been given to wildlife and bio-diversity issues.

The proposals are not clear on the mix and proportion of land uses, with what appears to be a leaning towards an almost wholly residential scheme. There is no question that a development of the scale proposed will greatly increase the volume of traffic passing through the residential streets of the village. Overall the concern is that the people of the local community are most likely to suffer the harmful impacts of the development by way of increased traffic overlooks back gardens, loss of rural character, without any discernible benefits.

TRAVELLERS

I believe that it is also proposed to put travellers sites here too. As Travellers are not allowed to be put on flood plain land - Surely this rules West Horndon out. Also the financial effect this would have on our homes. I believe Basildon Council have reduced council tax on houses which were close to the Crays Hill Travellers sites but they have also lost £100,000 off their house prices. How is Brentwood Council going to respond to this please.

National guidance states that "Local Plans should develop robust and comprehensive policies that set out the quality of developments that would be expected of the are, responding to local character and being visually attractive" A local planning authority should also submit a plan for examination which is sound in respect of how it is prepared, whether proposals are properly justified, whether it can be delivered, and whether it is consistent with national policy. Given the level and extent of the concerns as set out above the plan clearly has fundamental shortcomings. It is not therefore sound or robust. The borough Council in consultation with the village is urged to carry out a study of West Horndon, focusing on infrastructure, services, amenities and public transport. Only after this is carried out can the plan be said to be responding to the needs of the local community.

Please rethink putting so many new homes in West Horndon and spoiling it for future generations. People who live in West Horndon have chosen a village location not a town.

I would like to object to the proposal in the Draft Plan for West Horndon. The plan states that West Horndon has good transport links, this is not correct. The A127 during rush hour is more often than not at a standstill and any large development in West Horndon can only add to this. The A127 is classed as undersized for the amount of traffic that uses it and there have been numerous consultations with regard to improving the A127 but none of which has been agreed or carried out so therefore the A127 is not adequate. The only access to the A127 from West Horndon to go towards Basildon is by Station Road. Any large development of housing would greatly increase the amount of traffic along this road and the junction with the A128. The A128 can be very dangerous due to the speed and amount of traffic which will only increase when the new container port is opened.

In Core Policies CP2c it states that development should not take place on green belt land that is used for food product or at risk of flooding. The green belt land that is north of the factory estate has all of these so I cannot see why it has been chosen for housing. West Horndon has been flooded a number of times in the past and building on this land can only increase the possibility of flooding in the future. Any flood relief scheme would increase the possibility of flooding south of the railway towards Bulphan.

The village school is over subscribed and any new housing would require children to travel to other schools. This would mean that small children currently living in West Horndon would be at a disadvantage of attending the village school and therefore would have to travel out of the village to another school as there is no local alternative school.

At present the secondary school children attending Brentwood County High School have to go by bus to the school and this school I understand to be at its full capacity, therefore where will any additional children attend school? The factory estate has been a problem to the village for sometime because it has had a change of use from manufacturing to warehousing which has increased the amount of lorry traffic through the village day and night. The lorries are quite considerable in size and during the night do not adhere to the speed limit along Station Road therefore interrupting the sleep of the occupants in Station Road. If the factory estate is not developed for housing a new road from the factory estate to the A127 would then stop the necessity for lorries to use Station Road and St Mary's Lane to get to the factory estate. Most of the occupants of West Horndon I believe would support the development of the factory estate for housing which would increase the number of dwellings within the village it would not swamp it and the number of lorries would decrease. The green belt designated for housing would swamp the village and I cannot understand why 43% of the future housing development within Brentwood area is designated for West Horndon which would change the nature of the village to the disadvantage to the existing residents.

There is mention in the report for the provision of a site for travellers. The location and size of this site is not indicated within the plan so I cannot see how any comments can be made if the information has not been provided.

The report in Justification 3.8 States [To ensure that the development takes into account long term community aspirations for the village the Council will seek a community master planning exercise to determine the precise scale, nature and siting of development and associated works] I would have thought that this should have been carried out before the Local Plan was issued so I could have commented on something that was detailed and not an outline with very little substance or detail.

Whilst I recognise that the borough requires significant housing development, potentially in line in numbers with that identified within the Local Plan 2015-2030, I strongly object to the proposed concentration of new dwellings, over a sustained period of time, within the identified West Horndon Opportunity Area.

The construction of 200-250 new dwellings within West Horndon, every year, for 15 years, will firstly expand the town beyond recognition. Based on the current population size (which is broadly stable), the proposals would see it essentially triple in size. Whilst there are proposals for improved infrastructure, it is questionable whether this is truly sustainable within the land area proposed. The density of construction required will not be in-fitting with this beautiful countryside location, where houses are two stories tall at most, with a significant proportion of bungalows. High rise or even medium rise flats are not at all in-fitting with current town character.

Secondly, as our council, Brentwood Borough Council has the obligation to serve existing residents, not just new ones. Those who have made West Horndon their home will see a material depression in their house values as the 200-250 new dwellings come on to the market. There will be no compensation to the existing residents, which feels highly inequitable for such a small population.

Thirdly. Whilst the attractions of expanding at West Horndon are clear, one must question market demand for 200-250 new dwellings each year, in the same place, over 15 years. This demand is unproven, and highly questionable. Is it right that just under half of individuals looking to live in the entire Brentwood Borough, will want to all live in the same place? In a completely new development? It is worth highlighting on this point that the newer, small sized dwellings completed within West Horndon more recently have struggled to sell, particularly those allocated as "affordable housing" (development in question: 191 Thorndon Avenue). Simply finding one place to build nearly half of the dwellings required by the Borough does not mean people will decide to live in them - they need to be in varied locations reflecting local demand.

Lastly, your plans to allocate the bulk of all required traveller sites to West Horndon again looks highly inequitable. I would also question suitability - West Horndon has been flagged as a key area for expansion due to its location to rail links; in essence, this is land prime for development for commuters and local business workers. Travellers, with limited ties to one location, do not have these requirements and indeed it is not clear why the same land so prime for employment and fixed residential communities, also makes sense for a traveller community.

Hence in summary, I strongly object to the proposal in its current form. West Horndon is a small village that whilst can accept a decent level of development, should not be targeted at such a level. It appears that it has been viewed as a fix for the entire borough, and indeed I fear that if these plans are bourn out you will end up with a bloated stock of houses in one location with limited demand vs. supply. The solution needs to provide housing where it is actually needed, and well balanced across the Borough. This proposal fails on both counts.

[see attached comment for further submission]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

See Attached

See attached

See attachment

See attached

See attached