brentwood.gov.uk

It is not clear that growth on the scale required by central government of Local Authorities under present conditions is capable of being sustainable. Brentwood's certainly isn't.

This third point is also connected to the fundamental consideration of sustainability. The Plan's SP01 (Sustainable Development) paragraph D a.) talks of preserving and enhancing "the character and settlement setting of our borough of villages" - but the plan as proposed does not do this. Firstly it stifles all the borough's villages by proposing no development sites in them - even small ones, to allow the elderly to downsize and the young to find affordable properties - with the three exceptions of Blackmore (R25, R26), West Horndon (R02) and Kelvedon Hatch (R23, R24). Secondly it takes the ossification of villages as an excuse to pile unsustainable development proposals on the borough's main settlement areas - and does so in contradiction to itself. SP01 D d.) talks of ensuring "the transport network can satisfactorily accommodate the travel demand generated and traffic generation would not give rise to adverse highway conditions or highway safety concerns or unacceptable loss of amenity". But the town centre already suffers adverse highway conditions, highway safety concerns, and unacceptable conditions for residents (especially by reason of air pollution and congestion). Yet the decision has been made to cluster numerous residential sites, some of very significant sizes, in areas which already have these problems (R03 all the way through to R20). The selection of these sites already fails to adhere to the Plan's SP03 (Health Impact Assessments) A a.) " the location, density and mix of land use", b.) "street layout and connectivity", e.) "open and green space" and g.) "air quality and noise" even as far as existing residential dwellings and experience goes.