currently updating 3rd April 2018

When reading reports, examine the facts as while certain details are accurate others maybe totally misleading (as the opposite is true)!

BRENTWOOD’S REPORTS confirm DUNTON unsuitable for development.

For reasons please read under heading, ‘BASILDON: Council Tax INCREASE &/or REDUCED SERVICES’.

BRENTWOOD BOROUGH COUNCILs inaccurate 2015 & 2016 REPORTSBASILDON & BRENTWOOD COUNCILs reports lack certainty of details:

  • Little, if any new infrastruture for either of their developments, just rely on Basildon’s District current  Infrastructure.
  • No Schools until after 2034 and then when?
  • BRENTWOOD – No infrastructure advised at all – plus various inaccurate reports.
  • HOW CAN ANYONE MAKE COMMENTs ON Basildon & Brentwood Borough Councils PROPOSALS that do not have full detailed information, does not deal with MAJOR PROBLEMS, VITAL INFORMATION MISSING and contain INACCURATE INFORMATION!

1) To find out relevant information or
2) To support your comments/arguments to achieve a certain conclusion.

Is it easy to FABRICATE REPORTS? Simple answer ‘YES’.
What does one mean by Fabrication: Make untruthful statements &/or not corresponding with fact or reality.
How can this be done one asks, Answer ‘EASY':
(i) You employ a firm/company/organisation (ii) You give them your instructions and tell them what you want to achieve (iii) You only supply the information you want them to know (iv) Ensure that do not supply information in order they can carry out the relevant checks that what you supply is accurate (helps by not advising them how to) (v) When you receive the draft report send back with suggested amendments (may supply inaccurate information in support) and this can be done several times
(vi) Accept Final Report when backs up what you want to achieve, even if facts have been; Manipulated, Falsified or Omitted.

a) No NEW Train Station ever really considered or envisaged.
b) BRENTWOOD REPORTS: ( just 5 examples – You decide if reports FABRICATED on these points alone)!
(bi) No comment regarding Major Gas PIPE_LINE
and how will be dealt with to ensure never any problems. NOT ONLY should Brentwood Council state they have done ALL relevant research but ALSO confirm they are absolutely positive that any development will be perfectly SAFE & RISK FREE.
When you read their reports they give the impression that the best area for development is DUNTON HILLS GARDEN VILLAGE (Previously Dunton Garden Suburb) as places like ‘PILGRIMS HATCH’ are the the worst. This has proven to be TOTALLY FALSE as their CHIEF ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER has stated, ‘No problems with
air quality at ‘PILGRIMS HATCH’, in fact appears the best area for 2,300 New Homes (as put forward in one of their reports, when accurately amended)!
(biii) Omitted
any reference to superb Greenfield Sites and other areas North of A12.
(biv) Infrastructure List what people want to read about but have little or no intention of providing in the forseeable future. Knowing what maybe provided will be totally
(bv) Know area is a critical drainage area and not suitable for development which they describe as fenland, likely to flood but then leave problem for
developers, residents and water authorities. Brentwood Council do state, ‘They will provide water features’!
Also mention likely water and soil contamination.

ALL BRENTWOOD HAVE DONE IS MAKE A POLITICAL DECISION TO BUILD over 46% of NEW HOMES AT DUNTON (taking building figure of 7,600) – WHICH THEY CONSIDER OUT OF (Brentwood District) AREA. That is besides over 7.5% at West Horndon.

BEST AREAS in BRENTWOOD are: Pilgrims Hatch; Shenfield, North Brentwood and Greenfield sites North of A12 AS PROVED when using accurate details .
SEE also under Heading – Brentwood Proposed Sites.


Referred to as DUNTON HILLS GARDEN VILLAGE – (Greenbelt Site).

Brentwood STARTING WITH 3,500 New Homes as aiming to bring their developments forward + Gypsy & Travellers pitches/sites, then increase both —– Back door Proposals!

Brentwood Borough Council’s propose to build at DUNTON due to political nimbyism.
Note regarding the Lower Thames Options to build a new link between Kent and Essex ROUTE 3 has been decided to be proceeded with by Highways England.

It has been reported this new town could eventually be of over 6,000 homes + large gypsy/travellers site which would mean a population of 20,000 – 30,000 and around 12,000 vehicles.
Brentwood then appears to intend to increase the number of homes as would still own open space in this development, as has been indicated in comments in due course, raising the figures by possibly by 50% (population 30,000+ 18,000 vehicles and
increasing gypsy/travellers site).
However, Basildon have presently approved to build only 300 New Homes and not the 2,300 previously indicated.

You have to look at both  Basildon & Brentwood Borough Councils proposals together, where you find that there is no real infrastructure planned at the present time.
Then you read about Water & Soil Contamination (+Flooding) without real details how this expensive work will be done and who will pay for it, if in fact dealt with at all!
How can any sensible person give realistic comments on poor quality reports, especially by Brentwood Council.
There appears no justification for Brentwood’s development except political bias!


Basildon Borough Council  Local Plan documents at Basildon Library in 2018 are not properly indexed and to find relevant information may take hours, only to find inadequate report information from the past.

VITAL INFORMATION still missing, Plus how to overcome major problems: Flooding, Roads and Transport, Hospital services etc. and ongoing costs.

One has to ask what are they hiding or are they trying to deliberately mislead people!



There are so many errors in reports or information missing that they cannot be trusted as  the reports twist/manipulate actual facts  and appear economical with the truth.

BRENTWOOD BOROUGH COUNCIL Reports are not completely accurate, some information appears deliberately inaccurate, missing or not provided.
(See Under HEADING – Brentwood Council for more details)
Brentwood boast 6th in country for Greenbelt and many parks.

      a) For Brentwood ALL areas  1 GOLD STAR

      CONFIRMED by ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH there is no problem with air quality in PILGRIMS HATCH.
      b) Regarding DUNTON air quality needs proper monitoring at least by Diffusion Tubes NOW. Cannot use ‘Comparitive Modelling’ as proven that Brentwood Council are economical with the truth.
      Taking into account the following: – i) No
      New Train Station ii) Air Quality iii) Essex Wildlife Trust against DUNTON development due to Biodiversity.
      Proves DUNTON is least the same rating as PILGRIMS Hatch or worse, under these 3 headings!
      Once again Brentwood Council economical with the truth with ‘CROSSRAIL’ coming to Brentwood and Shenfield stations, will increase demand for homes and make extra job opportunities. At DUNTON no real details at present.
      (See Under HEADING – Basildon Council for full details)
      Basildon Council slammed Brentwood Council’s 2015 local plan and in one year NO Improvement.
      It is apparent that not all areas of Brentwood District have been considered properly with accurate information so everyone will know the Pros and Cons.
      Best areas to build are PILGRIMS HATCH, SHENFIELD, NORTH BRENTWOOD and GREENBELT (North of A12) where there would be in great demand and raise everyones expectations.

Understand that the councils look at reports/amend if required when received.

CONCLUSION (Please read under page Heading, ‘CONCLUSION’ for full details)
As the councils are supposed to be co-operating it is hard to see how there is any justification for considering any development at DUNTON and
surrounding area until INFRASTRUCTURE known and how the WATER/SOIL contamination (+ FLOODING) will be dealt with, besides major problems overcome etc.!


Other relevant information.

Let us consider the following from reports: –

Local Primary Schools would have insufficient spaces, as would Secondary Schools, so new ones need to be built but none proposed until after 2034.


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 as Trust already reported has huge deficit and needs to make cuts, Laindon Health Centre and other existing primary health care places, ANSWER: NONE.
Their opinion not based on fact, just putting Health Services under further severe strain, increasing waiting times etc.

Report states will bring in new consumers (15,000 +) 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 7,000 plus).
Transport as proved by Basildon Borough Council 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 (and 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.

NOTE: No new train station. When this was suggested it was just a Red Herring (Councils Never would be built).

7. NEGATIVES in reports understated
I. Climate change – Obviously will be a serious negative effect – a population of 15,000+ and 7,000 + cars.
II. Reduce air quality, land and noise pollution – Obviously will be a serious negative effect – a population of 15,000+ and 7,000 + cars.
III. Increase waste generation – 4,000 to 6,000 new homes – Obviously will be a serious negative effect, a population of 15,000+.
IV. Water efficiency – How would improve water efficiency, not stated! Additional demand would mean major works needed as likely:
Flooding/Surface Water on parts of development possible, in fact probable.
Potential water pollution, likely without massive investment before building.
V. 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?
VI. 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.
VII. Significant adverse effect on GREENFIELD sites.

8. MISSING from REPORTs besides detailed information, the following:
a) Gypsy/Traveller sites: It appears whatever is built can be increased at any time as developments in place: size, number of plots/pitches, location etc.
b) Will any Residents lose their homes through compulsory purchase, an injustice which should not be allowed or be adversely affected?
c) What proportion of site will be for Social Housing?
Whatever proportion is stated probably will be reduced in due course.

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! One wonders who will be making the money from these developments.

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. Brentwood reports continue to contain inaccurate information.