On Friday the housing developer City & Country informed Stansted Mountfitchet Parish Council that it is proposing develop on land between Stansted and Birchanger.
The first opportunity to discuss the proposal and formulate an official position on this it will be on December 11, when the Full Council next meets.
There are two key points that we wish to highlight to our community at this stage.
Metropolitan Green Belt
Firstly the land that City and Country have highlighted as central to their project falls with the Metropolitan Green Belt.
A consideration for granting green belt status is that in doing so space is preserved to prevent villages and towns merging together (“coalescence”).
Land with this status is protected from development and it would take decisions at the Planning Department at Uttlesford District Council to change this.
The Local Plan
Uttlesford District Council are in the latter stages of formulating its Local Plan. Their current Regulation 19 version of the Local Plan identifies only a handful of sites around Stansted Mountfitchet where housing development should occur. These sites includes places such as land off High Lane and near the existing Walpole Meadows development.
No land has been allocated for development in the area proposed by City and Country Planning.
Community Drop-in
City & Country will be holding a community drop-in event on this Thursday (28 Nov – 3-7pm) at Bishop’s Stortford Football Club Hall, Dunmow Road, Bishop’s Stortford CM23 5RG.
They have also launched a website devoted to their plan:
https://cityandcountry-stanstedbirchangervision.co.uk
At this site you are invited to leave your thoughts on the development:
https://cityandcountry-stanstedbirchangervision.co.uk/have-your-say/
Let us know your thoughts
Please feel free to let us by leaving a comment under this post what you think about City & Country’s plans.
5 thoughts on “Major development proposed for Stansted and Birchanger”
Philip Everett
Nothing new should get in the way of the completion of the Local Plan to its current belated timetable.
In the longer term, if we are to contemplate the use in this way of Met greenbelt, and housing targets suggest we might have to, it needs more national guidance on what to get in return for the general good. I’d like to see more and safer walking routes and cycling routes between urban centres, but this development offers only a disjointed vision of that with no connectivity and should for now at least be resisted as the thin end of a greenbelt-busting wedge.
Lin Watson
The local area has changed considerably in the last 5 years with abundance of ugly new builds. Unfortunately the impact on roads and parking this area as become chaos. Anger on the local roads because people cant get from A to B quickly enough. Our villages with new developements are no longer villages but just endless ‘new towns’. Our wildlife, which are so important for human life, is being destroyed. Also the local waste of public money as in the case of Bishops Stortford, we now have a new multi storey and a three level TK Max could have been affordable housing. Another concern is that fact this new developers dont make ‘affordable’ housing. Where are the developers who built aims housing for the elderly and social housing. Those sort of buildings here and there are much more acceptable.
I would like to see these developers more away of environmental issues . I am not happy at all about these new developmenrs. I cant get a dentist or doctors appointments as it is
Tony Matthews
This is green belt farmhand. I understand the current government do not care about the green belt, but if and only if we do need these extra homes there is plenty of other land near Stansted that does not come under the green belt.
That includes grey field sites near the M11 that have not been farmed for years.
The existing nearby roads cannot cope with the extra traffic, especially when other local roads are closed.
They are already full to capacity.
Are City and Country going to pay for the upgrading of local roads?
Bishops Stortford is currently expanding and the main roads have not been upgraded for all these new homes.
The A120 bypass is already bad, how much more traffic can it take?
Local residents do not want Stansted and Birchanger to merge into one.
This will make one large urban sprawl combining Stansted, Birchanger and eventually Stortford.
It will kill local identities.
They say improved paths and cycle paths. Where to?
There are no decent existing pavements, footpaths or cycle paths going south into Stortford.
Unless they improve them all the way into Bishops Stortford it is pointless, they will just lead around in circles.
They say about parkland etc for children and recreation.
Those areas are already natural playgrounds for the local children and communities.
Anything they put in will just be artificial and will ruin the natural habitat for the local wildlife.
Presumably the new parkland will have to be maintained etc. Who will be doing that and who will pay for that maintenance.
If they want to provide facilities for local youngsters they could fund the provision of a local youth centre and pay for it for the next 20 years.
They could provide sports facilities such as 3G pitches for use by existing junior teams and local schools etc.
but they will not offer to do anything like that because they are looking to maximise their profits.
There are large areas of grey/brownfield sites behind the school alongside the motorway that could be used if we really do need more affordable homes in the area. These areas are not currently being used for anything, why destroy the existing farmland?
They say they will provide affordable housing.
What they mean is they will squeeze in lots of smaller houses.
Both my children grew up in Stansted and have only just got on the housing ladder (neither could afford Stansted) in their mid 30’s.
Unless they promise to provide flats from £125k and houses from £175k they will not be affordable to local young residents.
Their proposal makes it sound like they are doing this for the good of the local community.
They are not. This is an attempt to cash in on the governments pledge to build more homes and not worry about existing residents and communities.
Maralyn Plumb
I am against this development as the land is green belt and is very well used by walkers and dog walkers alike, it is a joy which will be taken away and in its place a ‘country park’, joining Stansted to Birchanger is another sticking point. We have had a fair share of development in Stansted over the last few years, the roads can’t cope, the GP’s can’t cope, we are a small village with tiny roads, which are already a mass of pot holes caused by heavy construction traffics. We feel enough is enough. The housing won’t be affordable, at least not for local people, and the residents will be out of towers moving to the ‘countryside’. Please listen to the local people and take residents opinion and evaluate again.
Adam Jones
Having studied the Greenbelt policy by Uttlesford Council this greenfield, greenbelt land is performing strongly to prevent coalescence between Birchanger and Stansted, is home to a huge amount of wildlife including bats and is an area at risk of natural subsidence. There are numerous other sites that are not greenbelt therefore these fields should remain as such unless there is a ‘very special reason’ in line with planning guidance to permit a change in direction which there isn’t. 50% affordable housing is not required in Stansted.