updating March 2017 with further upadtes to come.
BRENTWOOD, after 2 years, still have no idea of any INFRASTRUCTURE.
BASILDON – Infrastructure looks like an inadequate wish list and what will actually be provided?
BRENTWOOD – No infrastructure advised at all – plus various inaccurate reports.
No Schools until after 2034 and then when?
HOW CAN ANYONE GIVE COMMENTs ON PROPOSALS that do not have full details/content and VITAL INFORMATION MISSING?
QUICK synopsise of reports:
2016 Basildon Council’s whilst improved not of standard expected. 2015 Report was poor as no real details, just if/maybes etc.
2016 Brentwood Council’s a waste of time, as is a consultation of the 2015 consultation as still no infrastructure/details etc.
ALL BRENTWOOD HAVE DONE IS MAKE A POLITICAL DECISION TO BUILD 45% of NEW HOMES AT DUNTON – In additon to over 10% at West Horndon WHICH THEY CONSIDER OUT OF (Brentwood Districts) AREA, as both South of A127.
BEST AREAS in BRENTWOOD are: Pilgrims Hatch; Shenfield, North Brentwood and Greenfield sites North of A12 AS PROVED when using accurate details .
THAT IS AMENDING INACCURATE 2015 REPORT INFORMATION.
SEE also under Heading – Brentwood Proposed Sites.
MUST ALSO READ under headings: –
(i) BASILDON COUNCIL major problems etc.
(ii) BRENTWOOD COUNCIL
BELOW COMMENTS ON 2015 REPORTS – SOME STILL RELEVANT
16th February 2016 – Read also REPORTS – DUNTON v NEW COUNTRY TOWN etc. – Further updates to be made.
It is accepted the proposed New Infrastructure is inadequate. In 2015 it was non existent.
The fact is the infrastructure that maybe put into place if this development goes ahead will be insufficient to support this New Town, either in full or in part.
The council’s reports still contain: Potentials, if, what, maybe’s and not based on facts, unless they are not telling anyone!
PLANNING in 2015 advised that once site up and running, costs would have to be met from taxpayers for funding maintenace etc.
therefore, insufficient funding.
Reports contain so many potentials, suggestions, maybes, ifs, buts, guesses, unjustified opinions, it proves that there is no meat on the bone or actual facts but just to try to get the plans approved as soon as possible.
Comments/objections are required by 24th March 2016 but how can you make any comment other than to object as Basildon & Brentwood Council’s are: –
- Both Council’s trying to get their own ideas in through the back door!
- Both Council’s state they are not working together! Or are they, with trying a different ploy?
- Both Council’s fully aware of Lower Thames Crossing and probably have been for sometime. Probably cause severe problems for A127 and surrounding Towns.
- At last Basildon Borough Council confirm/admit there will not be a new train station.
Who will live on this development, probably mainly people from out of the area e.g. London.
One year on from 2015 Brentwood Borough Council still have no proposals for infrastructure, which they say will consider later to put into their Masterplan,
so how can one comment on their proposal for this NEW TOWN?
If they cannot come up with proposed infrastructure in one year, one has to ask are they competent and how can they be trusted!
Not only for this development.
2015 REPORTS – some information still relevant
Let us consider the following from the reports: –
The report states will Improve educational attainment and social inclusion, a throwaway comment as new schools will be needed (though appears none stated in reports will be built) and standard not known (i) Of Teachers (ii) Of pupils. They are implying will
assist 20-40% in the most deprived areas of BASILDON – Where are these areas; How come they have not got an exact figure; how do they know as most sales will probably go to out of area (e.g. London people) – unless they can fully explain and back up with factual documentation, other than pure guesswork.
Schools: As David Cameron, the Prime Minister, has said on Television there will be no reduction in the amount paid per pupil at schools but figure will remain static for
several years, so no funding for permanent brick built schools available and how about maintenance/staff costs!
Local Primary Schools would have insufficient spaces, as would Secondary Schools, so new ones would have to be built.
Report states Increase in Public Open Space though they consider this is only suggested when in fact a Great Loss of Green Belt. In Brentwood’s report states could lead to significant negative effects on the landscape. Also on ‘Soil and Contamination’ states ‘all options would lead to negative effects due to Green Belt land take.
Report states will Improve Health – How? The NHS needs billions, how much will be given tor Basildon Hospital (Trust already reported has huge deficit and needs to make cuts), Laindon Health Centre and other existing primary health care places.
This appears is their opinion not based on fact, just putting Health Services under further severe strain, increasing waiting times etc.
Any payment (if any) will be one off so not cater for future needs e.g. Staff costs/maintenance and Basildon Hospital under further strain, where at times lucky to find a parking space.
Report states will bring in new consumers (18,000 +) and temporary jobs, no real new lasting jobs and no chance of increasing employment opportunities, so in fact means higher unemployment in the surrounding areas.
Report states road congestion can be mitigated when in fact it appears roads will be congested, (extra cars 8-12,000 – Transport as proved by Basildon Borough Council proves that several junctions would be over capacity + A127). There will be an increase in size of traffic jams (from Southend to London and back, besides adversely
affecting all local roads) and one wonders if would cause near Gridlock (as journey times for all would increase)! As far more cars on the roads will increase pollution. Also appears the road alterations required will be inadequate to meet demand and not adequately funded!
If widen A127 it will only move traffic jams a short way in either direction.
6. TRAIN STATION
NOTE Basildon Council in 2016 confirm no new train station.
7. Their NO IMPACTs in reports that are really NEGATIVES
I. State Reduce local contribution to climate change – Obviously will be a serious negative effect – a population of 18,000+ and 8-12,000 cars.
II. State Reduce air, land and noise pollution – Obviously will be a serious negative effect – a population of 18,000+ and 8-12,000 cars.
III. State Reduce waste generation – 4,000 to 6,000 new homes – Obviously will be a serious negative effect, a population of 18,000+..
IV. State Improve Water efficiency – additional demand would mean major works needed, potential water pollution and not
advise how would improve water efficiency.
8. NEGATIVES in reports understated
• Flooding on parts of development possible, in fact probable.
• Potential water pollution, likely without massive investment before building.
• Potential significant negative effect on habitats and species within and close to it.
Informed Essex Wildlife Trust opposes development – They have looked at area of land.
Appears just like Dry Street ignore facts, as money to be made. Informed not building on PLOTLANDS but building nearby could this adversely affect this area?
• Negative effect on Basildon Borough Heritage buildings and archaeological sites.
Brentwood Gazette 30th March 2015: English Heritage has reservations about impact of Dunton Garden Suburb &/or West Horndon development.
• At present GREENFIELD site.
9. MISSING from REPORTs besides detailed information, which Brentwood Council stated is forthcoming!
a) Surface water on areas of land at times now, so would need great investment.
b) Gypsy/Traveller site: Nothing actually mentioned in reports/assessments: size, number of plots/pitches, location etc., though
understand will be at least several hundred as both councils will use part of the site for this purpose. Councillors must know their
intentions, as know number of new homes! Brentwood council appear to have done either very little or nothing for them in this
respect for years.
c) Residents will lose their homes through compulsory purchase.
d) Infrastructure Finance: Where will all this money come from to finance the development, will it be adequate – highly unlikely – to build additional healthcare facilities, roads, schools, drainage, etc.
e) What proportion of site will be for Social Housing?
It is no good saying government will fund as country is Bankrupt after last government and austerity in place for years to come. There will not be enough funds for above, plus maintenance and improvements year on year for the required
Both Basildon and Brentwood Council should place full page details in ALL local papers in South Essex, listing
objections, giving actual factual information on these points before decision is made.
The millions needed to provide the potentials in the reports appear will never be adequately provided and then the further millions to ensure maintained standards/improvements where required is just pie in the sky!
Reported in Brentwood Gazette about one particular site in Brentwood, if planning permission is granted land value would be £1,000,000+ PER ACRE but if
agricultural estimated at £40,000!
Basildon Council slammed Brentwood Council’s local plan in 2015 and understand believes their report(s) are economical with the Truth, including misrepresentations or information missing.