Comment
Strategic Growth Options
Representation ID: 9910
Received: 13/04/2015
Respondent: Brentwood Bus and Rail Users' Association
Many existing brownfield sites are remote from existing village centres (e.g. Clapgate and Thoby Manor) and will generate high levels of private car usage particularly during travel-to-work/school times. This will profoundly affect existing communities for the worse. Sympathetic and proportionate release of green belt land on the outer edge of communities with generous provision for truly affordable housing for the children of existing residents and incoming young families would create more sustainable communities, subject to sufficient infrastructure. Existing open spaces within communities (amenity land, village greens, community orchards and other open spaces) should not be released under any circumstances.
Consultation Questionnaire see attached.
Email: Strategic Growth Options Consultation - incorrectly structured question
Hi
I am in the process of completing the Strategic Growth Options consultation questionnaire and an unable to proceed because of what I consider a serious structural flaw in Q6.
Q6 reads: In order to provide for local needs is in preferable to greenfield sites on the edge of villages to be released, or to develop brownfield sites (both within the green belt)?
A Yes or No answer is required (with the option to comment).
However if the answers to Q6 are to be interpreted statistically, it is clearly not possible to answer a multiple choice question with a yes/no answer. Any qualification in the comment box renders analysis impossible.
This elementary error renders one of the most important questions raised in the consultation meaningless. I cannot believe that such a fundamental mistake in questionnaire construction can have been made on a key issue.
I would regard any answer to this question as invalid.
I would be interested to hear your comments as a matter of urgency.