Four questions have been received.

Kathryn Coffin has submitted two questions. 

1. Many Brentwood residents who have spent more time at home than normal

during the last year will have realised how much waste they generate and made an effort to recycle more. What is the council doing to increase the types of items that can be included in the kerbside recycling collections, e.g. Tetrapaks, tissuepaper and carrier bags?

While Tetrapaks can currently be taken to a recycling centre, this is not an option for residents without cars. Has the council given any thought to providing recycling bins for other lightweight items in a town centre location, or at supermarkets, if a kerbside collection is not possible?

Cllr Hossack responded as follows:

The recycling we collect is somewhat determined by the volatility of the end markets.  Whilst it is important to reuse and recycle products, this is not always possible. The items listed are not sought after by many of the material recycling facilities and processors and not by the one we currently use. 

‘Food and drink cartons’ are a composite of paper, aluminium and plastic, as such, they are problematic to recycle and there is only one processor, in Halifax, that we are aware of. Also, for plastic carrier bags there are limited end markets and contamination levels are high.

We now provide two containers for ‘food and drink cartons’ at our depot’s recycling site and the material recycling facility will advise on the acceptance of plastic carrier bags when end markets improve. It should be noted that sales of single use carrier bags have dropped by 95%, in the main supermarkets, since the introduction of the charge in October 2015.  Making the collection of such items easier is against present direction and thinking, and will not challenge society to think and act differently for the better of the environment.

Regards the suggestion of introducing recycling bins elsewhere; this would be a retrograde step as in previous years we had up to nine recycling sites, but unfortunately, they were abused and misused for many years by householders depositing unwanted waste. 

2. Please could the council explain why it is not maintaining the green at the

junction of Wharf Road and Rollason Way, given that the council adopted this

land a couple of years ago? The grass has not been cut this year and is now

waist height.

The green is an important resource for flat residents on Rollason Way, who are currently unable to make use of it due to its poorly-maintained state. In addition, the overgrown state of the green presents a fire risk and is preventing residents from being able to properly clean up their dog mess. I understand that councillors have been requesting action from the council on this for two years now. I have tried contacting the council online and been told it is 'already reported/in progress', but the grass has still not been cut.

Cllr Hossack responded as follows:

The green at the junction of  Wharf Road and Rollason Way  was cut  week beginning 7 June 2021 and is on a schedule with all other grass areas under the Council’s maintenance programme.  The schedule seeks to cut grass on a 3 to 5 week cycle, however due to weather conditions this sometimes may appear longer, as the grass can grow quicker at certain points of the year. 

Susan Kortlandt has submitted two questions

1. It is now one year since the mobile phone masts were removed from Ewing

House and there is still no sign of the promised (temporary) replacements. As the re-development of Ewing House is now complete, will the mast(s) now be

replaced there?

When can mobile phone users expect to be re-connected to a functioning

service?

Cllr Hossack responded as follows:

Firstly, this is an ongoing situation that the Council agrees is wholly unsatisfactory for those residents and businesses in parts of Brentwood who cannot receive mobile phone signal.  Questions about mobile phone coverage and customer service should be directed to the mobile network operator.  It is their responsibility to provide this service, and I would suggest that customers could choose to move to an alternate provider if that service was not being adequately provided.

The owner of Ewing House decided to remove the masts as part of redevelopment.  The owner is not proposing that masts be reinstalled now that the building has been converted to residential use.  Landowners are within their rights to make such decisions as masts on buildings form part of an agreement between them and the relevant mobile network operator.

The Council has made efforts to resolve the unsatisfactory situation regarding lack of coverage by engaging with the mobile network operators on temporary and long-term options to use four Council-owned sites.

At Masefield Court, a residential building, a planning application was refused in July 2020 on grounds that the masts were detrimental to those living in the building, like those in the top floor penthouse flats looking directly at the equipment.  We have been working with the operators to install temporary masts, but following investigations of the roof by their contractors it has been concluded that the structure may not be suitable for installation.  We have provided further information following our own survey, which the operator may choose to use to determine whether the masts can be installed.  Overall, regardless of the planning application decision the issue rests with the operator to identify suitable sites from a technical point of view.

Near to Pastoral Way and Coptfold Road, two separate pieces of Council-owned land have been discussed with the operators to accommodate temporary masts.  Ground investigations and agreements regarding equipment location and access have been discussed.  For Coptfold Road we are nearing agreement, with use of part the land soon to be advertised in the Brentwood Gazette and ratification by the Lands Tribunal.  In both cases we have asked for a proposed installation date but are still awaiting news on when this will be.  In both cases for the long-term, alternative permanent sites will be discussed.  Permanent planning applications for these locations were refused on grounds of determinantal impact, decisions that have recently been upheld by a Planning Inspector at appeal because the harm would not be outweighed by public benefit.

At Coptfold Road multi-storey car park, an application was refused in June 2020 on grounds that it would be ‘detrimental to the character of the area and for nearby residents.  This has recently been allowed by a Planning Inspector at appeal when weighing the other decisions to refuse permission and the overall need for coverage, concluding that the multi-storey car park was the most appropriate site.  Work to progress relevant agreements is already underway to confirm landownership for equipment needed at ground level.  Hopefully this will mean that permanent masts can be installed soon.

Throughout all of this, the health and safety of our residents has been paramount.  We have prioritised preserving the young tree orchard at Pastoral Way and keeping the use of the Coptfold Road Green to a minimum.  However, I understand that it is vital for social and economic wellbeing that people have mobile phone coverage.  I am frustrated that the operators have not yet found solutions.  The Council has committed significant resource help solve the problems.  We will continue to work as fast as we can to get long-term answers. 

2. I welcome the Council's proposals for measures to make Brentwood greener, but should like to see far more action on climate change.

How will the Council ensure that residents' views and ideas feed into the

process? Will you consult with a Brentwood Climate Change Action Group?

Cllr Hossack responded as follows:

We are presently waiting for our Carbon Reduction Officer to start who we hope will be in position before the start of September.  This officer will be working on our Carbon Neutral Plan and as part of this work it will include how we engage with all stakeholders including residents. 

The method on how to engage has not been determined yet but the Council will be engaging on the development of the plan and then moving forward we will need to consider how we consistently engage with residents on the work undertaken, being undertaken and progress towards the performance measures that will be set.