Residents pleased that housing development has been refused
- Credit: Archant
A four year campaign to stop two controversial housing developments in Uttlesford has been successful this week.
Fairfield Partnership wanted to build 800 new homes in between Henham and Elsenham and Land Securities would build 700 near Little Easton - in Easton Park.
The Secretary of State has just dismissed the two separate appeals, which would have totalled 1,500 new houses, but residents of the two areas have been campaigning ever since their original planning application.
It was first rejected by Uttlesford District Council in 2014, and so it has taken 18 months for a decision to be announced.
Chris Audritt, chairman of Little Easton Parish Council, was “delighted” with the news.
You may also want to watch:
He said: “This has been a huge cloud hanging over the village of Little Easton for well over 4 years since April 2013 when the application was first submitted by Land Securities.
“This decision is the result of a huge effort over a long period of time by the residents of Little Easton, the Parish Council, both past and present, and our Parish Clerk and District Councillors and I would like to thank everyone for their support and this means we hope now to have protected this special part of the countryside for future generations.”
- 1 Dedicated children's hospital set for Cambridge
- 2 Chelmsford bypass 'could provide strategic link' to Stansted Airport
- 3 An afternoon at the Proms for Mountfitchet House residents
- 4 Minute silence at council meeting for 'kind-hearted' Uttlesford officer
- 5 England call-up for Max Malins after hat-trick in Saracens' demolition of Bath
- 6 First 'building block' of Harlow town centre major regeneration approved
- 7 Fine form continues with seven-up for effervescent Saffron Walden Town
- 8 Last-gasp heartbreak for Saffron Walden against unbeaten Ipswich
- 9 David Walliams’ Gangsta Granny coming to Cambridge stage
- 10 Nursery school faces 'imminent closure' without cash boost
There are people from both areas that are happy it has been refused.
Councillor for Elsenham Parish Council Campbell Dunn said: “The thing is that the infrastructure isn’t there to support a development of that size and that’s why it failed the hurdles.
“I moved to the area just over two years ago, so I am not against development, but it wasn’t stable for the area, it was just too big.
“The authority would not be able to provide schools and roads for that and so [the proposal] was not up to standard.”
Residents for Uttlesford, have said that they believe the refusal to extend existing settlements means new housing developments are the only sustainable option.
Alex Armstrong, member of Residents for Uttlesford and Councillor for Dunmow Town said: “With the rejection of the major sites that are extensions to Dunmow, Saffron Walden and Elsenham, the only viable solution is two brand-new settlements to meet housing need.
“Unlike in existing towns, building new settlements ensures that all key infrastructure is provided by developers, such as new schools, roads, medical centres and jobs.”