A120 junction proposal

As you may know, the developer of Brook Green, Wayne Gold and his company Goldev have proposed a new junction on and off the A120 to Millennium Way. An application has been submitted and is awaiting verification.

The proposed junction would be built under a Section 106 agreement, meaning the developer would pay for a majority of the construction in return for planning approval for the Brook Green development over a mile away.

Previous documents submitted by the developer suggested that they had mitigated traffic concerns with adjustments to Pod Brook road and Springwood roundabout that would magically make traffic queues disappear. So why the new A120 junction proposal?

If you disagree with the new junction proposal in any way then you must submit an objection as soon as possible. The developer will take advantage of a lack of objections and use it to push the council to approve the scheme.

Here are a few points you may like to raise in your objection:
  1. The applicant now accepts that his development would have a “detrimental impact on the local road network”. This is something that the local community has argued from the start, as it is obvious to anyone who uses the roads.
  1. The developer now accepts that the level of improvements he had previous argued would address all traffic concerns and solve the traffic issues would not in fact do so. They now concede that there is very “limited potential to provide improvements given the on site constraints of the town centre junctions”. What the developer means is that it is impossible to improve the local roads in a way which means they would truly cope with the developments extra traffic.
  1. The developer now says that his development will have a negative impact on traffic levels on the A120 such that he should carry out works to improve it. But Highways England stated “the proposed development is unlikely to have an adverse impact on the strategic road network. We therefore offer no objection [to the application]” He is only saying that so that he can argue that his proposal 4 miles away is DIRECTLY LINKED to his development (as it has to be) when it clearly is not.
  1. The developer says it will allow improvements to the A120 to be brought forward IN THE SHORT TERM. The A120 is being improved in any event by 2026. However, the development would be there forever, ruining a community and the Flitch way FOREVER. Does that justify a short-term gain in 10 minutes travel on the A120?
  1. It is interesting indeed that Mr Gold made his plans known in the media before he even submitted them. Is this all really just a publicity stunt to try and engender support from the local community? If it is, it has failed. No one is fooled by these promises and changed their mind about the development as a result.
  1. The developer seeks agreements from any future development that might benefit from the A120 improvements he proposes to recoup any loss to himself. Does this show that this a completely a self serving proposal designed to have minimum effect on Mr Gold himself or his profits but to try, wholly inappropriately and frankly rather desperately, to persuade the Council to grant his application because he knows that it must fail on the merits of it. Is he trying to buy the grant of the application?

In summary, this A120 proposal is entirely inappropriate, unlawful (under s106) and will not mitigate the negative impacts caused by the development which have been shown evidentially to far outweigh any perceived benefit.

We understand that there is a need for appropriate development and housing in the area. However, Brook Green remains the wrong solution in the wrong place at the wrong time.

See full detail on how to submit an objection.