Scattered housing is scatter brained
I AM an old resident of Felsted, and following your front page story of December 13 Housing plans met with public outcry I have browsed the 53-page leaflet – Uttlesford Core Strategy – which I find very thorough and helpful. It is abundantly clear that U
I AM an old resident of Felsted, and following your front page story of December 13 Housing plans met with public outcry I have browsed the 53-page leaflet - Uttlesford Core Strategy - which I find very thorough and helpful.
It is abundantly clear
that Uttlesford District Council is required to consult and submit a plan for the future of Uttlesford, within the national and regional context, or face
May I therefore put forward one more reason to favour of option four, building a new settlement near Elsenham, from the above consultation leaflet.
Plans for the future are necessary, but must take into account the
- 1 243 Takeley homes granted outline approval despite concerns
- 2 Dunmow pilots airlift medical aid to help Ukraine
- 3 Life-saving kit that residents hope they will never use
- 4 Stebbing Tractor Run: This is the new route for 2022
- 5 Man dies at the scene of A120 'incident'
- 6 How to celebrate the Queen's Platinum Jubilee in Essex
- 7 Musical theatre stars to bring the West End to Saffron Walden in celebration of Rodgers & Hammerstein
- 8 Aythorpe Roding come up short in league opener
- 9 Dunmow Velo: New group ride for beginners as RideLondon due
- 10 Recap: A120 reopens near Stansted Airport after 'police incident'
unexpected green issues (nothing to do with Chelmer Mead who ignore Uttlesford Core Strategy requirements), and recession in industry, and airways, could alter future housing needs in our area.
Scattered housing is 'scatter brained'. The research into preparing the core strategy, covering infrastructure, policy framework, spatial strategy, and surrounding centres of employment, etc, for the eight sites under consideration, must have involved a great deal of time and expense.
However, if experience of Oakwood Park is anything to go by, non-compliant developers with plans for expansion, have cost the district council in planning and legal defence an unacceptable sum.
Imagine therefore a change in any requirement for housing, necessitating planning and legal action
for eight developers,
instead of just one, and the resultant cost to us rate payers. Option four would seem to best meet the current situation.