This week’s papers cover the formation of the Save Stansted Village residents group that opposes unsustainable and predatory development in Stansted Mountfitchet. They have formed to fight a barrage of speculative development applications.
Under the Uttlesford Local Plan, Stansted was only scheduled to get 60 new homes because they have seen approvals for 700 new homes since 2001 – a 33% growth. However Uttlesford District Council (UDC) seems to be increasingly losing control over planning because it is behind with meeting its required supply of applications for 415 new homes per year. Because of this, recently the planning inspector found against the council and for the developer in a Dunmow development appeal.
That means that emboldened developers are lobbing in building applications right, left and centre. So in the last month speculative applications have come in for an additional 428 new homes in Stansted, even though UDC only wants to build 60 over the next 15 years.
The applications are:
- 170 by Taylor Wimpey on Pennington Lane
- 58 homes on Elms Farm, Church Road
- 200 on Walpole Farm (adjacent to the Taylor Wimpey site)
From the Saffron Walden Weekly News:
Residents in Stansted Mountfitchet have set up the Save Stansted Village group to oppose “unsustainable housing developments” – mirroring similar groups in Henham and Elsenham, Newport and Saffron Walden.
Ray Woodcock, spokesman for the group, said: “We are all Stansted Mountfitchet villagers at the moment but we want others to join us from Bishop’s Stortford, Henham, Elsenham and everywhere.
The Saffron Walden Reporter also covers the story:
Gail Hogg, of Bentfield Green, a founding member of Save Stansted Village, “As residents we feel we have to try to do everything we possibly can to protect what we value and love around us.”
Stansted Parish Council is against the idea of building homes in that area of the village. Chairman Geoffrey Sell told the Reporter: “We are not against development but it has got to be in the right location. Bentfield is the wrong location; in our submissions to the Local Development Framework we ruled it out…..the infrastructure is already at crisis point.”