If you want to say NO to this development sign HERE
The following applications are currently “pending consideration”. Please get in touch with any queries or requests for referrals.
- First floor front extension, open front porch, demolition of existing garage construction of two storey side extension, part two storey part single storey rear extension, raised patio area, balustrade and steps and new window to front and side elevations. Construction of new room in basement
48 London Road Brentwood Essex CM14 4QG
- Demolition of former print works and redevelopment to provide a mixed use development comprising 3 x retail/ commercial units at ground floor level and 5 residential units (2 x 1 bed and 3 x 2 bed units), communal amenity space and associated works.
17 – 19 Kings Road Brentwood Essex CM14 4DJ
- First floor rear extension.
51A Westwood Avenue Brentwood Essex CM14 4NU
- Rear conservatory and alterations
9 Westbury Drive Brentwood Essex CM14 4JZ
- Increase to the height of the existing roof to provide two residential apartments within the roofspace
Craven Gate Lorne Road Warley Essex
- Hip to gable roof including velux roof lights to front, conversion of loft to create second floor.
26 Junction Road Warley Essex CM14 5JN
- Single storey rear extension. The proposed extension would extend 6m beyond the rear wall of the original dwelling, the maximum height of the proposed extension would be 3m and the proposed eaves height would be 3m.
Concerned parents have been in touch asking me about the recent planning decision to refuse an expansion of St Peter’s School in South Weald to allow a higher intake.
I had no information as the school isn’t in my ward and because the decision was a purely County Council one. I rang County Cllr David Kendall and he shared my disappointment that this was refused.
I have asked the County Cllr for South Weald to give me an update on the situation and indicate where we can go from here as it does seem there is a case for this that I would be happy to support.
Residents have been calling me in the last few weeks after reading my latest newsletters in which i divulge the shocking admission made by Conservative-run Brentwood council that demonstrates a complete lack of planning and abdication of responsibility.
Of course, residents are worried. In over 10 years in charge the Conservative administrations has failed to put aside money to maintain council houses and flats. Drake House alone needs £700,000 spent on it (new boilers and lifts), Masefield Court needs considerable refurbishment, there are two elderly homes that will need lift replacements and Railway Square and Sir Francis Way need attention due to ongoing damp issues.
This is deplorable behaviour. Maintenance of our council homes should be a priority but the Tories ignore those who most need help.
Brentwood Gazette’s soapbox this week asked what your local councillors thought of Jeremy Corbyn’s comment of introducing all women carriages on trains. Cllr Aspinell asked me to do this, and here’s my response:
First of all, I feel it worth clarifying that Jeremy Corbyn didn’t say this is what he would do, but that he would ask women what they want (fair enough).But why just women? It’s not the 1950s, women are able to hold their own against men and this segregation takes us back to an unequal society where we are perceived as feeble little creatures unable to cope and it’s not the answer. There’s surely many more options to consider.I’d also put in a pitch for the majority of men who are just decent individuals going about their business with no intention to harm or abuse anyone. Further, doesn’t this put a question mark over those women who choose not to use such?Consider the case of a good friend of mine who was severely abused trying to board a train in her electric wheelchair. Her abuser? A fellow woman verbally attacking her for the inconvenience caused by her disability and the vehicle getting in her way. So, of course, perfectly entitled to travel in the same “female only” carriage and continue her attacks for the entire journey.People are vulnerable for things other than their gender: disability, a little too much to drink, feeling unwell or just scared whilst travelling for a myriad of reasons. Instead, similar to the night safety buses employed in some big cities, why not consider a monitored safety carriage for everyone who needs it?Or how about we look out for each other a bit more and speak up or raise the alarm if needed?
Now, this isn’t in my ward but of course many Brentwood West residents will be members, two of my friends included who have used the gym extensively over the last couple of years and are quite upset to find it will go.
You might also be interested to know that this is just two minutes from my front door and, therefore, I am concerned about the parking in the local area.
But, as it is not my ward, I thought it best I share the words of Cllr Jill Hubbard, Lib Dem councillor for Warley who has done a sterling job and manage to get a stay of closure:
You’ve received this e-mail because you’ve previously contacted me about the take-over of LA Fitness by Pure Gym. This is just a quick update.I have visited and spoken to Ray, the manager of LA Fitness and on the face of it, as you know, nothing much can be done, as this is a business move which as local authority BBc has no influence over.However, I understand that the Brenwood branch of LAF has been one of the most profitable for them although the brand overall has lost money.Many people have E-mailed the CEO of Pure Gym to try and persuade him to keep the gym as it is but that’s not their business model. Unfortunately some of these e-mails have been quite aggressive & abusive but one long-term member has had several telephone conversations with the CEO who sounds like a reasonable guy. He has said he would be open to another franchise purchasing the club from Pure Gym in light of the strength of local feeling. He would be open to a reasonable offer and has agreed to stay the start of the work for four weeks. Another option would be that members purchase the club but that would be quite complicated and involve far more of the responsibility of day to day running, upkeep & staff salaries. If there are any members used to running businesses who’d be prepared to take this on then that may be a way forward but currently the one valiant member is e-mailing/ writing phoning other health Clubs to see if he can drum up interest from them.The CEO said between £1million – £2 million butt hat is far more than the premises is worth as it stands and it’s doubtful the business could realistically be valued at that price.Another aspect I’m looking into is who is the landlord (BBC?) of the building, as apparently he (or that body) has been reluctant to agree to any internal changes in the past. Pure Gym plan to practically gut the internal fabric so this may also be a lever we have.Advice I’ve received from the Planning Department is copied below. My questions have been answered in blue:1. Is Planning aware of the proposed changes and does Pure Gym need planning permission for any of their proposed works and/or changes to capacity and/or all day operation?· Response: Council records indicate that the opening hours are restricted to 6.30-22.00 (Mon-Fri) and 9.00-22.00 (weekends and holidays). If the hours are to change then the owners will need to submit a planning application to vary these times.· The works that you have described are internal and provided there is no material change of use away from the gym, increasing the number of users does not require planning permission.2. Given that Pure Gym intends to increase the membership significantly and may well operate 24/7, there are likely to be significant parking problems in the area and possible late night disturbances affecting residents. What can the Council do to anticipate such problems and ensure that Pure Gym isn’t trying to expand beyond the capacity of the adjacent car park and streets? Should residents be consulted for such changes?· Response: From a planning perspective, there is no restriction on the number of members but presumably for safety reasons there is a finite number of users that can use the gym at any one time; providing 24/7 opening hours does not necessarily result in the need to expand the capacity of the car park, it may even spread the number of vehicle movements across a longer period of time resulting in fewer vehicle movements between the current opening hours. If an application is submitted to vary the opening hours application is where an objective assessment can be made on the car park capacity and travel /parking arrangements.
I am delighted to say that Tim Farron is our new leader! This is a real new dawn for liberal Britain after, shall we say, a difficult time! People are now starting to see what we did in government and give us credit for it, when before they just wanted to destroy and punish us.
With Tim, we will be therefighting for fairness for everyone, so….
Up until 8th May, there had been Lib Dems in national government for five years and a Lib Dem led administration in Brentwood. Then, along came the general election, the politics of fear and we are almost wiped out in government (although we are busy rebuilding with 18,000 new members and, as of Thursday, a new leader – who I hope will be Tim Farron) and Brentwood goes blue. Again.
But what that has left me with is, not just a sense of pride that we did good things in government and at Brentwood Council, but also a knowledge – from my year as part of a council administration – that things can be done differently.
This hit home to me this week as the Brentwood Tories gaily sold off The Old House, backtracking on the Accord’s rescue plan. Our plan generated ongoing income to the council over the years after all, we will be bankrupt in about five years if we don’t start generating income. This is what Cllr Louise McKinlay said, as quoted in the Brentwood Gazette as she talked of the Conservatives’ poor record over ten of the previous eleven years:
“Did we do anything around income generation. No.”
Conservative Leader of Brentwood Council, Cllr Louise McKinlay…whom is entrusted with your money…”
But of course, it doesn’t stop at this.
Ward budgets and community funding have been slashed
More good officers will be losing their jobs
The borough bulletin will be scrapped
There will be no robust programme for apprentices
Free food recycling bags will not be distributed
….and I don’t suspect this will be the end of it.
Which brings me on to Cllr McKinlay’s pal David Cameron and his pal George Osborne. If you are poor or in need – or just a hard working single parent – then don’t expect to do well out of this. I already know that one hardworking, single mum who is going to be a whopping £1,600 a year worse off thanks to Dave and George. This would not have happened if the Lib Dems were still holding them back in government.
Sounds like THIS is coming true…..
Residents have received a note from a developer regarding a potential development on the piece of land between Pennyfields and Crescent Road. I don’t know any more than this at the moment, but I do intend to come along on Tuesday night to the developers’ Q&A session.
At this stage, best to go with an open mind and see exactly what’s planned – it could be an improvement – it could be awful, So let’s go along and find out and take a decision from that.
What’s for sure, I will speak up for residents when it comes to planning permission.
The Accord’s financial provision for promoting democracy has been wiped from the budget by the Tories because they see it as a “job for political parties”.
Well, they would they have millions to promote Conservatism – a point made by Professor Brian May on Question Time recently over the money that they have and how they won the election.
Where does that leave independent candidates and smaller parties if the only view voters get is the Tory one?
So, my vision is that the council promotes democracy, where to find information, how to vote, information on different levels of government etc etc etc…..
Let’s hope we can tweet over the noise!