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
You may also want to watch:
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 TSB closes Dunmow branch
- 2 Dunmow and Stansted councillors not in new Essex County Council cabinet
- 3 New Dunmow and Barnston vicar thanks community for their warm welcome
- 4 Lockdown eases: new mayor and new Priest join drive-in concert
- 5 New cycle network consultation announced
- 6 New on-call firefighters have joined stations
- 7 Prison sentence extended for man involved in Dunmow attack
- 8 Local Elections 2021: Essex County Council results for Uttlesford
- 9 Outgoing mayor reflects on 'a Covid year' in office as he steps down
- 10 Uttlesford's shops still suffer from low footfall, Google data shows
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.