The policy is supported on the basis it seeks an integrated approach to the provision of Green Infrastructure which would include sport and recreation facilities plus seeking new development to make appropriate provision either directly or through financial contributions.

Once again disabled access and fcilities haven't been mentioned

Policy 10.10 - Green Infrastructure

We note that this policy aims to 'maximise opportunities for the creation, restoration, enhancement, expansion and connection of Green Infrastructure and ... major development proposals should seek to include elements of Green Infrastructure and Ecological Networks'. We request that the enhancement of the public rights of way network is included in this Policy, especially increasing the connectivity of the current Bridleway network.

Comments Regarding
Brentwood Draft Local Development Plan - Issued Jan 2016

1)Introduction

I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to the Brentwood Borough Draft Local Development Plan.
The Plan and the attachments and appendices are voluminous (hundreds of pages). Reviewing the documents had to be done on line as printing was impractical. The volume, copious use of abbreviations and jargon made reviewing it extremely difficult particularly when it came to cross referencing. I had hoped that visiting the drop in display at the Town Hall would have been of help. For example, I was unable to find details in the Plan on the future population and demographics of Brentwood. On approaching a council representative I was advised this was in an attachment however they were unable to find it. It has not been an easy task reviewing the Plan.
As a resident, in North Brentwood I have seen many changes over the years as the area's population has grown.
I particularly value the open countryside (Green Belt) and strongly support its protection. I regularly walk both Weald and Thorndon Park and use the extensive public right of ways which cross the district. Although I walk into town it is not a particularly pleasant experience due to the high volume of traffic which generate high levels of noise and pollutants. Until recently I frequently cycled, however the dangerous state of the roads ( e. g pot holes) and the high volume of traffic, which is often unsympathetic to the cyclist, has restricted this activity. As a motorist I experience the usual lengthy traffic jams and hold ups which clog up Brentwood during peak times and school term. The bus service to and from town is good however it is often late due to adverse traffic conditions.

2)Population Growth and Demographics

This whole plan is has been drafted to show how Brentwood District Council intends to cater for a 15% rise in population over an 18 year period to 2030.
The population growth primarily arises through inward migration, much of which will be from London. The Plan states that the Brentwood's present population is over 73,500 with a significant level of retires - an ageing population trend projected to continue. There are over 32000 properties 76% owner occupied, 63% being detached or semi detached; 58% being 3 or 4 bedroomed, 25% 2 bedroomed.
The only forecast I could find regarding population increases were in PBA Objectively Assessed Housing Needs, Appendix B SNPP 2012 Migration. This stated ' ---- the population of Brentwood is projected to increase from 74.0k in 2012 to 85.2k in 2030'. This is an increase of 15% (11,200 people), however 7200 dwellings are to be built giving an average occupancy rate of 1.6 people per dwelling. If this correct how does this reconcile with Figure 7.1 in the Plan?
Of the projected 7200 dwellings to be built figure 7.1, states that 65% will be 1 or 2 bedroomed. Clearly this implies a dramatic change in Brentwood's environment and demographic mix however the Plan is silent on the implications for infrastructure (e. g. highways, schools, surgeries). As stated in AECOM Sustainability report, some of these are already at capacity.
The plan is also silent on the social and economic effects of this population growth on existing and 'new' residents.







3)Highway Infrastructure

Looking specifically at Ongar Road; over the years traffic volumes have vastly increased as residential properties have been build both close to the town and in the outlying villages. There has been no major structural improvements to accommodate this increased volume save for the installation of mini roundabouts and bollards - which regularly get knocked over and do not get repaired for months. This situation is typical of Brentwood district; Shenfield Road, Ingrave Road, Doddinghurst Road, London Road and other highways all have similar issues.
The Highway Modelling exercise undertaken by PBA confirms that Brentwood roads have insufficient capacity to handle today's traffic volumes. (See section 11 Summary of Junction Outputs) I believe this modelling exercise understates the true size of the problem. Two periods were analysed, 0800 to 0900 and 1700 to 1800, no account has been taken of the effect of the school term when students exit between 1500 and 1600. Why not? During that time traffic in Brentwood centre comes to a stand still, even the paths have insufficient capacity to handle pedestrians. I also note no analysis was undertaken of the M25 junction 28. From experience there are frequent, long queues of vehicles waiting to gain access to the round about.
The Sustainability Appraisal by AECOM also identifies air quality/pollution issues in North Brentwood and Brentwood centre and raised concerns regarding Shenfield.
In short - the investment in public highway infrastructure, namely roads, cycle lanes and footpaths has been totally inadequate. As more dwellings get built the situation gets worse. The district has grown significantly but the highway infrastructure has largely remained as it was over 50 years ago.
The Plan states its policies regarding sustainability however it fails to identify any significant initiatives regarding highway infrastructure which address problems associated with traffic congestion and pollution, cycling or walking. Building more dwellings without properly addressing these issues first will be to the detriment of residents well being and employment prospects in Brentwood.


4)Green Travel Route

This Plan advocates adding public transport to the already congested A127 and A128.
The A128 is a very busy, narrow trunk road carrying passenger and commercial vehicles. At present, when stopping for passengers, buses cause hold ups particularly during school times and where there are no lay-bys. Adding more buses will slow traffic and create more noise and pollution for residents close to the road.
People do cycle along the A128 however it is a dangerous exercise as drivers have difficulty in overtaking and can become impatient. A cycle path would improve the situation.
Installing a 'Green Travel Route' would be a retrograde step, adding to the existing congestion and pollution and should not be actioned.


5)Public Rights of Way (PROW)

The Plan needs to actively consider the opportunity to open up access to the surrounding countryside and parks by investing in upgrading and creating footpaths and bridleways for non vehicular use. At present access routes to both Weald and Thorndon Parks encourages the use of cars at the expense of walking and cycling. Paths which cross the A12 and A127 are dangerous and recently there has been serious accidents involving pedestrians; public are reluctant to use them. The Ordnance Survey shows 6 PROWs crossing the A127 between the M25 and the Dunton intersection. Similarly there are 4 PROWs crossing the A12 between the M25 and Ingatestone.
To the North of the A127 footpaths provide access to open spaces and in particular Thorndon Park. Access to these areas from the south (Horndon and Basildon) is only practical using a vehicle. This is not satisfactory; building bridges over the A127 that connect the footpaths would enable none vehicular traffic to safely gain access to this wonderful amenity. Likewise a bridge over the A12 would enable people to move safely between Brentwood and Shenfield and outlying communities such as Pilgrims Hatch, Kelvedon Hatch and Doddinghurst. The paths would need upgrading to take cycles.
Weald Park is only 1 -2 kilometres from Brentwood centre yet walking or cycling to it using Weald Road and Weald Park Way is dangerous as the footpaths are not continuous, the traffic volumes high and the roads are narrow and winding. The paths should be upgraded and lengthened to enable pedestrians and cyclists safe access. The same could be said for Sand Pit Lane - a footpath is sorely needed.


6)Financial

Where are the financial figures that support this Plan? How can a plan be issued proposing such massive changes without some supporting financials e.g. infrastructure investment costs, impact on the tax payer.

7)Conclusion

The expansion of Brentwood District by over 20% through building 7200 new dwellings while increasing the population by over 15% (11,200 people) will have a dramatic effect on all aspects of life in Brentwood - social, environmental, commercial. It will change the nature and character of the area. Little demographic information is provided on who the new comers are and what their needs will be in addition to housing. It is hard to determine what benefit, if any, this expansion will have to present residents.
The draft plan is describes the proposed location of houses and the build schedule however I have major concerns over the need to upgrade Brentwood's infrastructure. My fear is the investment will not be forthcoming and policies relating to 'sustainability' will not be achieved. If that happens Brentwood will be a poorer place to live and work.

See attached

See attached

See attachments

See attachments

See attachments

See attachments

See attachments

See attachments

See attachments