A map of the proposal would help.
Some years ago (around 2000 maybe) when I worked there, at the behest of NATS management, I wrote a Safety Survey on the subject of taxiway naming, signage and low visibility operations and provided numerous recommendations. I may still have it lying around somewhere.
A few years beforehand, there had already been a change in the naming (from numbered taxiways to lettered) to conform to ICAO recommendations. It is the airport operator's responsibility, not ATC's, to design the layout that conforms to these recommendations which are also published in CAP168.
The design they came up with was certainly not optimal IMHO. What they did succeed in doing was moving towards compliance and away from most of the colloquialisms that were difficult for non-regulars/native speakers to understand.
Designating an area as "cul-de-sac" is the type of colloquialism they got away from for the most part. Others such as "Light aircraft hold" and "Light aircraft park" survived. There is no reference in the documents to "links" and they removed the "East link" only for locals to refer to it as the "Old east link".
This might turn into a ramble as I remember stuff that I thought I'd long forgotten.
The curvy-ness of taxiways maintaining the same name was always one of my bugbears and was often the cause of aircraft taking the wrong route. From what I can remember, these were some of my recommendations, none of which were adopted by the time I left in 2003.
Taxiway A should have continued straight ahead where it turned into B and ended at B4.
Taxiway J should have continued straight ahead where it turned into K and ended at K3.
Taxiway B from B1 but continued through A5 and J10 and ended at J7.
D, A and C in a straight line lasting what, 600m is just dull.
Taxiway L joins D at two places so you can taxy D-L-D in two different ways.
Taxiway G is something they got right. In LVPs it is isolated from the through route and allows aircraft to pass when traffic is pushed from gates 49-57 as long as they don't pass the stop-bars at G3, H3 or G4.
In RVR of less than 400m only one aircraft or vehicle was allowed to be in any one lit block. Is that still the case? There just weren't enough lit blocks to allow much of a movement rate without GMC grinding almost to a halt with nowhere to put the next arrival.
I'll see if I can find the report.
Sorry for the ramble.