The plan mentions need to address the needs of an ageing population - one need is for bungalows so ageing parents can move out their larger, family houses but still be near doctors, public transport, friends etc. The plan leaves it to developers to submit proposals without stipulating any need for bungalows. My concern is that if the Council do not stipulate a requirement for bungalows then we will have developments of large 4-5 bed houses (as they are more profitable) with nothing for older local people to downsize into.

I have read the Local Plan with interest. I am concerned that some of the proposals for additional housing are inappropriate and they will contribute further to the terrible traffic congestion at peak times and other issues that we face in the Brentwood and Shenfield areas.

Over-development of the area will destroy the quality of life that existing residents enjoy. Any encroachment on existing Green Belt land should be prohibited.

The night-time entertainment facilities in Brentwood are already adequate and further development of them should not be encouraged otherwise they will lead to further social issues, damage to the reputation of the town and destroy the attractive character of the town centre and surrounding areas.

Extra housing will bring extra traffic and there is no attempt in the Plan to address this increasing problem. Brentwood already comes close to total gridlock on occasions and building so many new properties will simply increase the problems.

The main roads in the area covered by the Plan are the A12 and the A127. Both are woefully inadequate for the demands being placed on them already and further development of housing or employment infrastructure (such as the ports at Harwich and Felixstowe and the London Gateway terminal) unleash huge numbers of trucks on to our local reads every day. The stretches of the A12 and the A127 that run through the area should be widened to 3 or 4 lanes in either direction and be upgraded to motorway standard with hard shoulders along their entire length for safety and to help avoid traffic delays in the event of a breakdown or accident.

The Plan mentions the need for housing suited for older and disabled residents yet Brentwood Council allows the existing stock of suitable homes to be depleted - I am referring to the ongoing demolition of bungalows in Shenfield and their inevitable replacement by huge 'executive homes'. Just because it is possible to demolish an existing property and squeeze on a much bigger one does not mean it should be done. Demolition of sound properties simply to make a quick buck for the developer is a very un-green practice and one the Council should strongly discourage. It is going to be impossible for older residents to stay in this area if this practice is allowed to continue.

The proposal to develop a huge number of houses on Officers Meadow in Shenfield (site refs 034,087 & 235) will not only destroy a valuable piece of Green belt land but will inevitably lead to more traffic joining the jams that already clog up the roads in to Brentwood at peak times and will reinforce the existing overlaod on the A12 Brentwood by-pass. This is a very large development and is out of all proportion to the surrounding area.

The proposal to build houses and other facilities off Priests Lane (site refs 044 & 178) will destroy a valuable piece of open land and will add to the terrible traffic jams that currently clog Priests Lane at peak periods. Priests Lane is too narrow for the amount of traffic that already uses it and the narrow pavement along only one side makes it very dangerous for pedestrians who walk along it in fear of being mown down by passing traffic attempting to negotiate its narrow carriageway.

The plan to build Dunton Hills Garden Village is going to destroy one of the atrractive corners of the borough. It is an enormous housing estate development and calling it a 'village' cannot disguise that.

Whilst the Crossrail development is to be welcomed I wonder how much capacity it will ad because there will be no additional tracks laid towards London and I suspect that some existing services may end up being cancelled to make capacity for the Crossrail trains on the already congested lines. Increasing goods trains as a result of the London Gateway and other ports around the Essex coast mean further risk of delays and disruption to passenger services.

What we really need is the development of new rail routes - connecting from Shenfield directly to Stansted (not via Liverpool Street) and across the Thames to Gatwick as these would do a lot to reduce congestion and stimulate development in the outer London area. This is in addition to the proposed additional road development and tunnels across the Thames at Tilbury linking the A2 to the M25.

I believe that my proposals would result in a more sustainable set of developments. I hope these comments will be noted and the Plan will be reconsidered.