Today's most viewed
EPPING: Service station flats face opposition
PROPOSALS to build 13 flats on the site of a former petrol station are being opposed amid fears they will not fit in with the surrounding area.
Applicant Insigniacorp Ltd wants to build two and three-bedroom flats at the flattened Wintry Park Service Station site, on Thornwood Road, in Epping.
But town councillors say the blocks would be too high and overlook neighbouring properties.
Mayor Ben Murphy said: "This site desperately needs developing. But they have still fitted in a huge amount of units."
Councillor Ken Avey was worried about the increase in traffic congestion. He said: "When it was a service station I recall it was quite dangerous to get in and out of."
Plans submitted by the same company two years ago were refused permission because of the height of the proposed flats when the district council said the development did not fulfil planning requirements concerning environmental issues.
The latest proposals show the flats split into two blocks, but the town council's planning and general purposes committee say they are still too high.
Councillor Rob Macrae told last night's meeting: "I don't object to the design, I actually think it's quite attractive. But it's too much for a small site."
Councillor Maxine Starling said: "I expect the rooms are toy town size which will be impossible to sell, like the ones at the top of Station Road."
A final decision will be taken by the district council.
3:01pm Wednesday 21st May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Mr Codgers, Snaresbrook on 5:42pm Wed 21 May 08
Yeah right, the flats will not fit into the surrounding area but a petrol station will? What idiots these objectors are. Wasting your time. They will get it on appeal so go and chase flies.if you have nothing better to do.
Yeah right, the flats will not fit into the surrounding area but a petrol station will? What idiots these objectors are. Wasting your time. They will get it on appeal so go and chase flies.if you have nothing better to do.
Posted by: Hurrmph, Not near these proposed flats thankfully on 6:19pm Wed 21 May 08
Mt Codgers, a petrol statuion is at least an amenity for local people. All these flats are is a big fat profit for the greedy developer at the expense of local people. Perhaps you and they are related in some way?
Mt Codgers, a petrol statuion is at least an amenity for local people. All these flats are is a big fat profit for the greedy developer at the expense of local people. Perhaps you and they are related in some way?
Posted by: Mr Codgers, Snaresbrook on 6:46pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Hurrmph[/bold] wrote:
Mt Codgers, a petrol statuion is at least an amenity for local people. All these flats are is a big fat profit for the greedy developer at the expense of local people. Perhaps you and they are related in some way?[/quote] Not at all related, but you cannot tell me you would rather have a carcenogenic place opposite you than a block of flats? It all boils down to people being envious when people make money out of property. It is sickening and pathetic and you will probably find if you delve back in time that houses stood on current petrol station sites like in Woodford. One is for SURE and MARK MY WORD! The applicants will win on appeal so instead of getting all the old fogies out and one man and his dog with feeble protests, go and help out with some voluntary work somewhere.
Hurrmph wrote:
Mt Codgers, a petrol statuion is at least an amenity for local people. All these flats are is a big fat profit for the greedy developer at the expense of local people. Perhaps you and they are related in some way?
Not at all related, but you cannot tell me you would rather have a carcenogenic place opposite you than a block of flats? It all boils down to people being envious when people make money out of property. It is sickening and pathetic and you will probably find if you delve back in time that houses stood on current petrol station sites like in Woodford. One is for SURE and MARK MY WORD! The applicants will win on appeal so instead of getting all the old fogies out and one man and his dog with feeble protests, go and help out with some voluntary work somewhere.
Posted by: Morris Hickey, Chigwell (Redbridge) on 7:04pm Wed 21 May 08
Flats are not family-friendly developments. There is a crying need for family homes, and all that developers can do is swamp the world with flats. Not only do they realise the immediate profit from the development they also have a long-term investment in the form of the ground rents for years to come.
I am by no means opposed to the principle of business resulting in profit, but in the case of many property developments those profits are too often excessive.
Flats are not family-friendly developments. There is a crying need for family homes, and all that developers can do is swamp the world with flats. Not only do they realise the immediate profit from the development they also have a long-term investment in the form of the ground rents for years to come.
I am by no means opposed to the principle of business resulting in profit, but in the case of many property developments those profits are too often excessive.
Posted by: Jane Cox, Epping on 12:01am Thu 22 May 08
Epping does not need any more bloody flats nor do this people need to be over looked in their own homes and gardens. Its about time Epping had some new family houses!
Epping does not need any more bloody flats nor do this people need to be over looked in their own homes and gardens. Its about time Epping had some new family houses!
Posted by: Jane Cox, Epping on 12:08am Thu 22 May 08
Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!!
Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!!
Posted by: arrow, wanstead on 12:20am Thu 22 May 08
Mr Codgers is clearly Mr Khalid. If Khalid is banned what about codgers?
Mr Codgers is clearly Mr Khalid. If Khalid is banned what about codgers?
Posted by: Chingford United Netball Team, E4 on 12:47pm Thu 22 May 08
[quote][bold]Jane Cox[/bold] wrote:
Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!![/quote] Why can we not compare Epping with Woodford?
Epping has a tube station and the road can easily support more flats.
The site at the moment is an eyesore. I cannot beleive that having flats next door to you will make your house less valuable then when you had a petrol station next door to you.
Jane Cox wrote:
Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!!
Why can we not compare Epping with Woodford?
Epping has a tube station and the road can easily support more flats.
The site at the moment is an eyesore. I cannot beleive that having flats next door to you will make your house less valuable then when you had a petrol station next door to you.
Posted by: Jane Cox, Epping on 6:53pm Thu 22 May 08
[quote][bold]Chingford United Netball Team[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Jane Cox[/bold] wrote:
Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!![/quote] Why can we not compare Epping with Woodford?
Epping has a tube station and the road can easily support more flats.
The site at the moment is an eyesore. I cannot beleive that having flats next door to you will make your house less valuable then when you had a petrol station next door to you. [/quote] Epping isn't a built up town like Woodford for starters. Secondly the site in question is next door to some VERY old cottages, houses and woodland, it is not an urban spot as you seem to think. The road cannot NOT "support more flats" furthermore the road currently does not support any flats and is a rather busy road as it is a major route to Harlow.
Why bother commenting on things you obviously aren't informed about, perhaps you should worry about what's happening on your own doorstep!
Chingford United Netball Team wrote:
Jane Cox wrote:
Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!!
Why can we not compare Epping with Woodford?
Epping has a tube station and the road can easily support more flats.
The site at the moment is an eyesore. I cannot beleive that having flats next door to you will make your house less valuable then when you had a petrol station next door to you.
Epping isn't a built up town like Woodford for starters. Secondly the site in question is next door to some VERY old cottages, houses and woodland, it is not an urban spot as you seem to think. The road cannot NOT "support more flats" furthermore the road currently does not support any flats and is a rather busy road as it is a major route to Harlow.
Why bother commenting on things you obviously aren't informed about, perhaps you should worry about what's happening on your own doorstep!
Posted by: J. C. B., Loughton (Big House) on 7:17pm Thu 22 May 08
Envious people who don't like seeing people make a few quid?
Envious people who don't like seeing people make a few quid?
Posted by: Jason Haddock, Epping on 7:17pm Thu 22 May 08
There seems to be more and more plans put forward for developments that the semi-rural town of Epping simply cannot handle. When residents object for sound reasons, people from neighbouring towns really get the hump and complain that they're being NIMBYs. The fact is that Epping is totally different to the big towns in the Epping Forest district, dare I say Epping is unique! It seems those people are merely jealous of what Epping and its residents have, as there towns are concrete jungles.
I know like Epping Town Council and many others that these plans are totally inappropriate and that we all want this land to be used rather than staying empty. And to all Epping residents, ignore these jealous people and together we'll see that the Epping of the future is one with new housing that is appropriate and sustainable, not just a sea of high density flats.
There seems to be more and more plans put forward for developments that the semi-rural town of Epping simply cannot handle. When residents object for sound reasons, people from neighbouring towns really get the hump and complain that they're being NIMBYs. The fact is that Epping is totally different to the big towns in the Epping Forest district, dare I say Epping is unique! It seems those people are merely jealous of what Epping and its residents have, as there towns are concrete jungles.
I know like Epping Town Council and many others that these plans are totally inappropriate and that we all want this land to be used rather than staying empty. And to all Epping residents, ignore these jealous people and together we'll see that the Epping of the future is one with new housing that is appropriate and sustainable, not just a sea of high density flats.
Posted by: Tom Waller-Hatton, Epping, Essex on 7:20pm Thu 22 May 08
[quote][bold]J. C. B.[/bold] wrote:
Envious people who don't like seeing people make a few quid? [/quote] No! People who don't want to see their town turned in to the next Loughton!
J. C. B. wrote:
Envious people who don't like seeing people make a few quid?
No! People who don't want to see their town turned in to the next Loughton!
Posted by: Chingford United Netball Team, E4 on 8:18am Fri 23 May 08
[quote][bold]Jane Cox[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Chingford United Netball Team[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Jane Cox[/bold] wrote: Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!![/quote] Why can we not compare Epping with Woodford? Epping has a tube station and the road can easily support more flats. The site at the moment is an eyesore. I cannot beleive that having flats next door to you will make your house less valuable then when you had a petrol station next door to you. [/quote] Epping isn't a built up town like Woodford for starters. Secondly the site in question is next door to some VERY old cottages, houses and woodland, it is not an urban spot as you seem to think. The road cannot NOT "support more flats" furthermore the road currently does not support any flats and is a rather busy road as it is a major route to Harlow. Why bother commenting on things you obviously aren't informed about, perhaps you should worry about what's happening on your own doorstep! [/quote] In fact I know the site very well, approx half a mile past Epping on the left hand side as if you are heading towards Harlow.
There is room for flats here.
If you want to live isolated then go and move to a lighthouse.
You live on a main road so stop moaning.
Jane Cox wrote:
Chingford United Netball Team wrote: Jane Cox wrote: Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!!
Why can we not compare Epping with Woodford? Epping has a tube station and the road can easily support more flats. The site at the moment is an eyesore. I cannot beleive that having flats next door to you will make your house less valuable then when you had a petrol station next door to you.
Epping isn't a built up town like Woodford for starters. Secondly the site in question is next door to some VERY old cottages, houses and woodland, it is not an urban spot as you seem to think. The road cannot NOT "support more flats" furthermore the road currently does not support any flats and is a rather busy road as it is a major route to Harlow. Why bother commenting on things you obviously aren't informed about, perhaps you should worry about what's happening on your own doorstep!
In fact I know the site very well, approx half a mile past Epping on the left hand side as if you are heading towards Harlow.
There is room for flats here.
If you want to live isolated then go and move to a lighthouse.
You live on a main road so stop moaning.
Posted by: chris, essex on 10:26am Fri 23 May 08
[quote][bold]Chingford United Netball Team[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Jane Cox[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Chingford United Netball Team[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Jane Cox[/bold] wrote: Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!![/quote] Why can we not compare Epping with Woodford? Epping has a tube station and the road can easily support more flats. The site at the moment is an eyesore. I cannot beleive that having flats next door to you will make your house less valuable then when you had a petrol station next door to you. [/quote] Epping isn't a built up town like Woodford for starters. Secondly the site in question is next door to some VERY old cottages, houses and woodland, it is not an urban spot as you seem to think. The road cannot NOT "support more flats" furthermore the road currently does not support any flats and is a rather busy road as it is a major route to Harlow. Why bother commenting on things you obviously aren't informed about, perhaps you should worry about what's happening on your own doorstep! [/quote] In fact I know the site very well, approx half a mile past Epping on the left hand side as if you are heading towards Harlow. There is room for flats here. If you want to live isolated then go and move to a lighthouse. You live on a main road so stop moaning.[/quote] Just because Chingford has been turned into a s**t hole is no reason why Epping should go the same way.
Chingford United Netball Team wrote:
Jane Cox wrote: Chingford United Netball Team wrote: Jane Cox wrote: Please don't compare Epping with Woodford! The site is next door to some VERY old cottages, and a house or two (it isn't a big site) would look great, and there is a real demand for houses in Epping. That many flats on such a small site is crazy and driven by pure greed! The road is very busy and yes when it was an Esso garage you could never get in or out of the bloody thing!!!
Why can we not compare Epping with Woodford? Epping has a tube station and the road can easily support more flats. The site at the moment is an eyesore. I cannot beleive that having flats next door to you will make your house less valuable then when you had a petrol station next door to you.
Epping isn't a built up town like Woodford for starters. Secondly the site in question is next door to some VERY old cottages, houses and woodland, it is not an urban spot as you seem to think. The road cannot NOT "support more flats" furthermore the road currently does not support any flats and is a rather busy road as it is a major route to Harlow. Why bother commenting on things you obviously aren't informed about, perhaps you should worry about what's happening on your own doorstep!
In fact I know the site very well, approx half a mile past Epping on the left hand side as if you are heading towards Harlow. There is room for flats here. If you want to live isolated then go and move to a lighthouse. You live on a main road so stop moaning.
Just because Chingford has been turned into a s**t hole is no reason why Epping should go the same way.
Posted by: Chingford United Netball Team, E4 on 10:41am Fri 23 May 08
Unfortunately Chris its already happening - very chavvy on a Friday and Saturday nite.
I welcome the building of flats and look forward to North Weald being redeveloped.
Unfortunately Chris its already happening - very chavvy on a Friday and Saturday nite.
I welcome the building of flats and look forward to North Weald being redeveloped.
Posted by: Ben Murphy, Epping on 10:55am Fri 23 May 08
It’s always good to see an active debate on the issues that matter to local residents.
As this article accurately states, this is not the first application that has been received for this site and the new application has started to deal with the issues raised in the reasons for refusal of the last application.
Parking has significantly increased from 1 space per unit to 2, all of which are nicely tucked away underground. The site is also no longer one large, bulky block of flats, which it was before, but has been broken up into two main sections. The general design of the property is, I believe, in keeping with its surroundings and the woods opposite.
With all that said, I still believe that the height of some of the units are excessive and will overlook some of the neighbouring properties. I also believe this to be an overdevelopment of this site and Epping Town Council’s planning and general purposes committee have recommended this application for refusal on those grounds to the principal planning authority, Epping Forest District Council.
It is important to note that we can’t refuse a planning application on the grounds that we would like to see family houses instead of flats. We can only deal with the application before us in legal planning terms set out by the Government’s Planning Inspectorate.
I do hope that any concerned residents will write in with their formal objections to: John de Wilton Preston, Director of Planning, Epping Forest District Council, Civic Offices, High Street, Epping, CM16 4BZ.
It’s always good to see an active debate on the issues that matter to local residents.
As this article accurately states, this is not the first application that has been received for this site and the new application has started to deal with the issues raised in the reasons for refusal of the last application.
Parking has significantly increased from 1 space per unit to 2, all of which are nicely tucked away underground. The site is also no longer one large, bulky block of flats, which it was before, but has been broken up into two main sections. The general design of the property is, I believe, in keeping with its surroundings and the woods opposite.
With all that said, I still believe that the height of some of the units are excessive and will overlook some of the neighbouring properties. I also believe this to be an overdevelopment of this site and Epping Town Council’s planning and general purposes committee have recommended this application for refusal on those grounds to the principal planning authority, Epping Forest District Council.
It is important to note that we can’t refuse a planning application on the grounds that we would like to see family houses instead of flats. We can only deal with the application before us in legal planning terms set out by the Government’s Planning Inspectorate.
I do hope that any concerned residents will write in with their formal objections to: John de Wilton Preston, Director of Planning, Epping Forest District Council, Civic Offices, High Street, Epping, CM16 4BZ.
Posted by: A very local resident, Thornwood Road, Epping on 11:14am Fri 23 May 08
Thank you Ben for having the voice of reason in this silly debate where people from outside of Epping seem to think they have an overriding opinion of what should happen on this site. I would like to ask if anyone has consulted any of the residents of Thornwood Road - what do they think!
Thank you Ben for having the voice of reason in this silly debate where people from outside of Epping seem to think they have an overriding opinion of what should happen on this site. I would like to ask if anyone has consulted any of the residents of Thornwood Road - what do they think!
Posted by: Chingford United Netball Team, E4 on 11:30am Fri 23 May 08
[quote][bold]A very local resident[/bold] wrote:
Thank you Ben for having the voice of reason in this silly debate where people from outside of Epping seem to think they have an overriding opinion of what should happen on this site. I would like to ask if anyone has consulted any of the residents of Thornwood Road - what do they think![/quote] Everyone has a right of opinion and whilst I work in Chingford I live in Epping Green so regardless I have a right to say what I think.
More homes are needed - I think it is a good thing
A very local resident wrote:
Thank you Ben for having the voice of reason in this silly debate where people from outside of Epping seem to think they have an overriding opinion of what should happen on this site. I would like to ask if anyone has consulted any of the residents of Thornwood Road - what do they think!
Everyone has a right of opinion and whilst I work in Chingford I live in Epping Green so regardless I have a right to say what I think.
More homes are needed - I think it is a good thing
Posted by: Ben Murphy, Epping on 11:30am Fri 23 May 08
As part of the statutory consultation process, residents who neighbour the property will be provided with application details and asked to respond to the address above. This will include the Corporation of London who own the land adjacent to the site. There is also a notice on the site with these details and will be statutory notices published in local press prior to a final decision being made.
As part of the statutory consultation process, residents who neighbour the property will be provided with application details and asked to respond to the address above. This will include the Corporation of London who own the land adjacent to the site. There is also a notice on the site with these details and will be statutory notices published in local press prior to a final decision being made.
Posted by: Nikki Bull, Epping on 12:12pm Fri 23 May 08
I agree why is it that people living in either East London or much bigger Essex towns always think their opinions matter more than those of the people who live in Epping and its surrounds villages?
I have to agree that it seems they are just jealous because the bigger towns in the district and London as a whole has been seriously overdeveloped.
As for the guy who obviously doesn't know the site and reckons its a urban area where loads of flats would be suitable, he is obviously just a wind up merchant and doesn't dare even post his real name! I can only confirm his views aren't those shared by residents of Epping Green. He sounds like [italic]another[/italic] p**sed off London resident, who wishes he lived in the countryside and not the urban jungle.
I agree why is it that people living in either East London or much bigger Essex towns always think their opinions matter more than those of the people who live in Epping and its surrounds villages?
I have to agree that it seems they are just jealous because the bigger towns in the district and London as a whole has been seriously overdeveloped.
As for the guy who obviously doesn't know the site and reckons its a urban area where loads of flats would be suitable, he is obviously just a wind up merchant and doesn't dare even post his real name! I can only confirm his views aren't those shared by residents of Epping Green. He sounds like
another p**sed off London resident, who wishes he lived in the countryside and not the urban jungle.
Posted by: Ben Murphy, Epping on 12:24pm Fri 23 May 08
[quote][bold]Chingford United Netball Team[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]A very local resident[/bold] wrote: Thank you Ben for having the voice of reason in this silly debate where people from outside of Epping seem to think they have an overriding opinion of what should happen on this site. I would like to ask if anyone has consulted any of the residents of Thornwood Road - what do they think![/quote] Everyone has a right of opinion and whilst I work in Chingford I live in Epping Green so regardless I have a right to say what I think. More homes are needed - I think it is a good thing[/quote] Well, on the whole you are indeed correct, but in the current housing market, there are a large number of flats available for sale or rent which remain empty. There doesn't seem to be a market for these at the current time, but on the other hand we all know how quickly the market can change!
Yes, the Government continue to tell us we need to provide more housing and in Epping Forest we need to provide me "affordable" and "social" housing. There is a big push from the District Council at the moment to offer part-buy schemes which I believe is helping many of our younger, first-time buyers get on the property ladder which is great.
However, we need to carefully balance our needs with government target demands and to ensure that properties are built in keeping with our beautiful rural surroundings. It's a difficult job, but we really are trying our best...!!
Chingford United Netball Team wrote:
A very local resident wrote: Thank you Ben for having the voice of reason in this silly debate where people from outside of Epping seem to think they have an overriding opinion of what should happen on this site. I would like to ask if anyone has consulted any of the residents of Thornwood Road - what do they think!
Everyone has a right of opinion and whilst I work in Chingford I live in Epping Green so regardless I have a right to say what I think. More homes are needed - I think it is a good thing
Well, on the whole you are indeed correct, but in the current housing market, there are a large number of flats available for sale or rent which remain empty. There doesn't seem to be a market for these at the current time, but on the other hand we all know how quickly the market can change!
Yes, the Government continue to tell us we need to provide more housing and in Epping Forest we need to provide me "affordable" and "social" housing. There is a big push from the District Council at the moment to offer part-buy schemes which I believe is helping many of our younger, first-time buyers get on the property ladder which is great.
However, we need to carefully balance our needs with government target demands and to ensure that properties are built in keeping with our beautiful rural surroundings. It's a difficult job, but we really are trying our best...!!
Posted by: Chingford United Netball Team, E4 on 12:41pm Fri 23 May 08
I wonder how many of the people commenting have actually been down to Epping Planning Office and looked at the revised plans.
All this talk of not knowing the area or being jealous of Epping is sheer nonsense.
With the new government guidelines a lot more homes are needed and I for one would prefer to see them on brownfield sites rather that greenfield.
This whole "not on my doorstep" philosphy is based on the sensless few.
I wonder how many of the people commenting have actually been down to Epping Planning Office and looked at the revised plans.
All this talk of not knowing the area or being jealous of Epping is sheer nonsense.
With the new government guidelines a lot more homes are needed and I for one would prefer to see them on brownfield sites rather that greenfield.
This whole "not on my doorstep" philosphy is based on the sensless few.
Posted by: Carley Woodbridge, Essex on 1:03pm Fri 23 May 08
The fact is that yes the site is 'Brown Field' however this isn't your average 'Brown Field' site. It is next to old builds which I believe are listed and woodland, never mind an extremely busy road.
Epping as a whole is some what unusual for the West Essex area, being so close to London but still being rural/semi-rural, something most people don't consider when they comment. Also with Epping being rural/semi-rural it simply doesn't have the infrastructure to take a lot of new build, no matter the site unlike bigger towns (Loughton, Harlow etc).
Comments form people living in London are mostly unhelpful and seem to be of the opinion "My area has been overdeveloped, why shouldn't yours".
Because of Epping's rural status and the large of amount of wildlife it is home to Natural England and C.P.R.E. are both keeping a keen eye on all new developments in Epping. We are not talking about a few more flats in a busy London suburb, we are talking about the Essex Countryside, something that needs protection now more than ever.
I'm am no way against new build in Epping, in fact Epping desperately needs more family homes, 3+ bedroom houses.
The fact is that yes the site is 'Brown Field' however this isn't your average 'Brown Field' site. It is next to old builds which I believe are listed and woodland, never mind an extremely busy road.
Epping as a whole is some what unusual for the West Essex area, being so close to London but still being rural/semi-rural, something most people don't consider when they comment. Also with Epping being rural/semi-rural it simply doesn't have the infrastructure to take a lot of new build, no matter the site unlike bigger towns (Loughton, Harlow etc).
Comments form people living in London are mostly unhelpful and seem to be of the opinion "My area has been overdeveloped, why shouldn't yours".
Because of Epping's rural status and the large of amount of wildlife it is home to Natural England and C.P.R.E. are both keeping a keen eye on all new developments in Epping. We are not talking about a few more flats in a busy London suburb, we are talking about the Essex Countryside, something that needs protection now more than ever.
I'm am no way against new build in Epping, in fact Epping desperately needs more family homes, 3+ bedroom houses.
Posted by: Patrick Tomlinson, Closer than London! on 1:20pm Fri 23 May 08
I just hate that greed has got in the way of a good idea. The plans on the whole are fine and a very good use of the land, but the developer has got greedy and wants to make the development high to squeeze in as many flats as possible. I would like to see the developer revise their plans and make the development much lower and by doing so they would also lower the density, if they did that I think everyone would be happy. No one in Epping wants an empty peace of wasteland.
One last thing to that idiot from Chingford (london) the site isn't outside of Epping as you state but in Epping! If it were outside of Epping as you stated it would be in the village of Thornwood Common, you may want to visit Epping sometime so you may get your facts right!!!
I just hate that greed has got in the way of a good idea. The plans on the whole are fine and a very good use of the land, but the developer has got greedy and wants to make the development high to squeeze in as many flats as possible. I would like to see the developer revise their plans and make the development much lower and by doing so they would also lower the density, if they did that I think everyone would be happy. No one in Epping wants an empty peace of wasteland.
One last thing to that idiot from Chingford (london) the site isn't outside of Epping as you state but in Epping! If it were outside of Epping as you stated it would be in the village of Thornwood Common, you may want to visit Epping sometime so you may get your facts right!!!
Posted by: Chingford United Netball Team, E4 on 2:50pm Fri 23 May 08
[quote][bold]Patrick Tomlinson[/bold] wrote:
I just hate that greed has got in the way of a good idea. The plans on the whole are fine and a very good use of the land, but the developer has got greedy and wants to make the development high to squeeze in as many flats as possible. I would like to see the developer revise their plans and make the development much lower and by doing so they would also lower the density, if they did that I think everyone would be happy. No one in Epping wants an empty peace of wasteland. One last thing to that idiot from Chingford (london) the site isn't outside of Epping as you state but in Epping! If it were outside of Epping as you stated it would be in the village of Thornwood Common, you may want to visit Epping sometime so you may get your facts right!!![/quote] Now Patrick,
There is no need to be rude - we are having a civilised conversation here. The fact is that the site is approx half a mile outside of Epping Town Centre, it is not in the Centre of Epping.
Anyway what has the exact location of it got to do?
For your records I am an Epping Green resident working in Chingford so stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
I have no time for simple people who have to resort to name calling as they do not have the intelligence to have a proper conversation.
Patrick Tomlinson wrote:
I just hate that greed has got in the way of a good idea. The plans on the whole are fine and a very good use of the land, but the developer has got greedy and wants to make the development high to squeeze in as many flats as possible. I would like to see the developer revise their plans and make the development much lower and by doing so they would also lower the density, if they did that I think everyone would be happy. No one in Epping wants an empty peace of wasteland. One last thing to that idiot from Chingford (london) the site isn't outside of Epping as you state but in Epping! If it were outside of Epping as you stated it would be in the village of Thornwood Common, you may want to visit Epping sometime so you may get your facts right!!!
Now Patrick,
There is no need to be rude - we are having a civilised conversation here. The fact is that the site is approx half a mile outside of Epping Town Centre, it is not in the Centre of Epping.
Anyway what has the exact location of it got to do?
For your records I am an Epping Green resident working in Chingford so stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
I have no time for simple people who have to resort to name calling as they do not have the intelligence to have a proper conversation.
Posted by: Jenny Garland-Colins, Theydon Bois on 3:52pm Fri 23 May 08
Comments from Londoners in general are unhelpful as they don’t seem to understand Countryside living and seem to see green space and forest and potential building sites.
The gentleman from “Chingford” &/or “Epping Green” is a wind-up merchant and has opinions that aren’t echoed by any Epping Green residents I know or have ever met, from this I assume he is a resent resident to Epping Green, who most likely used to live in London.
To summarise, the reasons why this development is unsuitable and most importantly unsustainable:
1) The proposal is a mass overdevelopment of the site
2) The site is on the extremely busy B1393, which will meaning people trying to get in & out of the development will have great trouble and hold up traffic in the process (same problems there was with the Esso garage)
3) The site borders very old houses, cottages and most importantly woodland. Current residents have Human Rights, which include not being over looked 24/7!
4) (On a personal note) I think the design could still be better, I would love to see a development that looks like its always been there.
I understand that as the Epping Forest Guardian newspaper is published by a company that publishes London newspapers, that it will attract readers and comments from London residents, I would just ask that they not comment if they have no knowledge of the subject matter and Countryside living in general. Also people shouldn’t be so quick to get ‘wond up’ by the many wind-up merchants on this website, comments stating they cannot wait for North Weald or Epping etc to be built on are only expressed to upset and wind-up local people, which they seem to do, don’t play in to these idiots hands.
Comments from Londoners in general are unhelpful as they don’t seem to understand Countryside living and seem to see green space and forest and potential building sites.
The gentleman from “Chingford” &/or “Epping Green” is a wind-up merchant and has opinions that aren’t echoed by any Epping Green residents I know or have ever met, from this I assume he is a resent resident to Epping Green, who most likely used to live in London.
To summarise, the reasons why this development is unsuitable and most importantly unsustainable:
1) The proposal is a mass overdevelopment of the site
2) The site is on the extremely busy B1393, which will meaning people trying to get in & out of the development will have great trouble and hold up traffic in the process (same problems there was with the Esso garage)
3) The site borders very old houses, cottages and most importantly woodland. Current residents have Human Rights, which include not being over looked 24/7!
4) (On a personal note) I think the design could still be better, I would love to see a development that looks like its always been there.
I understand that as the Epping Forest Guardian newspaper is published by a company that publishes London newspapers, that it will attract readers and comments from London residents, I would just ask that they not comment if they have no knowledge of the subject matter and Countryside living in general. Also people shouldn’t be so quick to get ‘wond up’ by the many wind-up merchants on this website, comments stating they cannot wait for North Weald or Epping etc to be built on are only expressed to upset and wind-up local people, which they seem to do, don’t play in to these idiots hands.
Posted by: Chingford United Netball Team, E4 on 4:06pm Fri 23 May 08
[quote][bold]Jenny Garland-Colins[/bold] wrote:
Comments from Londoners in general are unhelpful as they don’t seem to understand Countryside living and seem to see green space and forest and potential building sites. The gentleman from “Chingford” &/or “Epping Green” is a wind-up merchant and has opinions that aren’t echoed by any Epping Green residents I know or have ever met, from this I assume he is a resent resident to Epping Green, who most likely used to live in London. To summarise, the reasons why this development is unsuitable and most importantly unsustainable: 1) The proposal is a mass overdevelopment of the site 2) The site is on the extremely busy B1393, which will meaning people trying to get in & out of the development will have great trouble and hold up traffic in the process (same problems there was with the Esso garage) 3) The site borders very old houses, cottages and most importantly woodland. Current residents have Human Rights, which include not being over looked 24/7! 4) (On a personal note) I think the design could still be better, I would love to see a development that looks like its always been there. I understand that as the Epping Forest Guardian newspaper is published by a company that publishes London newspapers, that it will attract readers and comments from London residents, I would just ask that they not comment if they have no knowledge of the subject matter and Countryside living in general. Also people shouldn’t be so quick to get ‘wond up’ by the many wind-up merchants on this website, comments stating they cannot wait for North Weald or Epping etc to be built on are only expressed to upset and wind-up local people, which they seem to do, don’t play in to these idiots hands.[/quote] What is this segragation of Londoners and people from Epping!
It is laughable, Epping is on the borders of London and is linked. It is not segragated.
Why are you trying to distance yourself?
Your views are pathetic. I was born and brought up in Theydon Bois before moving to Epping, the Epping Green.
Even if I was born and bred in London, the East End, West End or South London that would not mean my views were of any less importance.
Take your blinkers off and wake up. This is the real world and not a class ridden split society.
Jenny Garland-Colins wrote:
Comments from Londoners in general are unhelpful as they don’t seem to understand Countryside living and seem to see green space and forest and potential building sites. The gentleman from “Chingford” &/or “Epping Green” is a wind-up merchant and has opinions that aren’t echoed by any Epping Green residents I know or have ever met, from this I assume he is a resent resident to Epping Green, who most likely used to live in London. To summarise, the reasons why this development is unsuitable and most importantly unsustainable: 1) The proposal is a mass overdevelopment of the site 2) The site is on the extremely busy B1393, which will meaning people trying to get in & out of the development will have great trouble and hold up traffic in the process (same problems there was with the Esso garage) 3) The site borders very old houses, cottages and most importantly woodland. Current residents have Human Rights, which include not being over looked 24/7! 4) (On a personal note) I think the design could still be better, I would love to see a development that looks like its always been there. I understand that as the Epping Forest Guardian newspaper is published by a company that publishes London newspapers, that it will attract readers and comments from London residents, I would just ask that they not comment if they have no knowledge of the subject matter and Countryside living in general. Also people shouldn’t be so quick to get ‘wond up’ by the many wind-up merchants on this website, comments stating they cannot wait for North Weald or Epping etc to be built on are only expressed to upset and wind-up local people, which they seem to do, don’t play in to these idiots hands.
What is this segragation of Londoners and people from Epping!
It is laughable, Epping is on the borders of London and is linked. It is not segragated.
Why are you trying to distance yourself?
Your views are pathetic. I was born and brought up in Theydon Bois before moving to Epping, the Epping Green.
Even if I was born and bred in London, the East End, West End or South London that would not mean my views were of any less importance.
Take your blinkers off and wake up. This is the real world and not a class ridden split society.
Posted by: Jenny Garland-Colins, Theydon Bois on 4:26pm Fri 23 May 08
[quote][bold]Chingford United Netball Team[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Jenny Garland-Colins[/bold] wrote:
Comments from Londoners in general are unhelpful as they don’t seem to understand Countryside living and seem to see green space and forest and potential building sites. The gentleman from “Chingford” &/or “Epping Green” is a wind-up merchant and has opinions that aren’t echoed by any Epping Green residents I know or have ever met, from this I assume he is a resent resident to Epping Green, who most likely used to live in London. To summarise, the reasons why this development is unsuitable and most importantly unsustainable: 1) The proposal is a mass overdevelopment of the site 2) The site is on the extremely busy B1393, which will meaning people trying to get in & out of the development will have great trouble and hold up traffic in the process (same problems there was with the Esso garage) 3) The site borders very old houses, cottages and most importantly woodland. Current residents have Human Rights, which include not being over looked 24/7! 4) (On a personal note) I think the design could still be better, I would love to see a development that looks like its always been there. I understand that as the Epping Forest Guardian newspaper is published by a company that publishes London newspapers, that it will attract readers and comments from London residents, I would just ask that they not comment if they have no knowledge of the subject matter and Countryside living in general. Also people shouldn’t be so quick to get ‘wond up’ by the many wind-up merchants on this website, comments stating they cannot wait for North Weald or Epping etc to be built on are only expressed to upset and wind-up local people, which they seem to do, don’t play in to these idiots hands.[/quote] What is this segragation of Londoners and people from Epping!
It is laughable, Epping is on the borders of London and is linked. It is not segragated.
Why are you trying to distance yourself?
Your views are pathetic. I was born and brought up in Theydon Bois before moving to Epping, the Epping Green.
Even if I was born and bred in London, the East End, West End or South London that would not mean my views were of any less importance.
Take your blinkers off and wake up. This is the real world and not a class ridden split society.[/quote] SIR, I am not going to engage in to a discussion with you, as you are obviously out for an argument.
However, neither Theydon Bois nor Epping "border London" perhaps a lesson in geography would be usual! Yes some of the district borders London but that is neither here nor there, the area in question is Essex Countryside, not urban London nor even urban Essex.
I would not expect to have any say over matters affecting London or a particular London Borough and I find it laughable that people from London seem to have the view that there opinions override those of local residents (as commented by another reader). If you do, as you state live in “Epping Green” and are from the local area I don’t see why you don’t understand the area and have such a passion to see Epping overdeveloped.
Epping, Theydon Bois, Coopersale, Thornwood are all parts of West Essex that have traditionally been and are rural, they haven’t had the development of places like Buckhurst Hill, Waltham Abbey, Loughton . . . and in turn have never had the investment in public services or infrastructure such as schools, doctors, etc. Epping doesn’t even have an NHS dentist! This is why so many people stand up when they hear news of development plans for the area, as it simply cannot absorb new developments as other towns.
Chingford United Netball Team wrote:
Jenny Garland-Colins wrote:
Comments from Londoners in general are unhelpful as they don’t seem to understand Countryside living and seem to see green space and forest and potential building sites. The gentleman from “Chingford” &/or “Epping Green” is a wind-up merchant and has opinions that aren’t echoed by any Epping Green residents I know or have ever met, from this I assume he is a resent resident to Epping Green, who most likely used to live in London. To summarise, the reasons why this development is unsuitable and most importantly unsustainable: 1) The proposal is a mass overdevelopment of the site 2) The site is on the extremely busy B1393, which will meaning people trying to get in & out of the development will have great trouble and hold up traffic in the process (same problems there was with the Esso garage) 3) The site borders very old houses, cottages and most importantly woodland. Current residents have Human Rights, which include not being over looked 24/7! 4) (On a personal note) I think the design could still be better, I would love to see a development that looks like its always been there. I understand that as the Epping Forest Guardian newspaper is published by a company that publishes London newspapers, that it will attract readers and comments from London residents, I would just ask that they not comment if they have no knowledge of the subject matter and Countryside living in general. Also people shouldn’t be so quick to get ‘wond up’ by the many wind-up merchants on this website, comments stating they cannot wait for North Weald or Epping etc to be built on are only expressed to upset and wind-up local people, which they seem to do, don’t play in to these idiots hands.
What is this segragation of Londoners and people from Epping!
It is laughable, Epping is on the borders of London and is linked. It is not segragated.
Why are you trying to distance yourself?
Your views are pathetic. I was born and brought up in Theydon Bois before moving to Epping, the Epping Green.
Even if I was born and bred in London, the East End, West End or South London that would not mean my views were of any less importance.
Take your blinkers off and wake up. This is the real world and not a class ridden split society.
SIR, I am not going to engage in to a discussion with you, as you are obviously out for an argument.
However, neither Theydon Bois nor Epping "border London" perhaps a lesson in geography would be usual! Yes some of the district borders London but that is neither here nor there, the area in question is Essex Countryside, not urban London nor even urban Essex.
I would not expect to have any say over matters affecting London or a particular London Borough and I find it laughable that people from London seem to have the view that there opinions override those of local residents (as commented by another reader). If you do, as you state live in “Epping Green” and are from the local area I don’t see why you don’t understand the area and have such a passion to see Epping overdeveloped.
Epping, Theydon Bois, Coopersale, Thornwood are all parts of West Essex that have traditionally been and are rural, they haven’t had the development of places like Buckhurst Hill, Waltham Abbey, Loughton . . . and in turn have never had the investment in public services or infrastructure such as schools, doctors, etc. Epping doesn’t even have an NHS dentist! This is why so many people stand up when they hear news of development plans for the area, as it simply cannot absorb new developments as other towns.
Posted by: CH on 6:19pm Fri 23 May 08
[quote][bold]Chingford United Netball Team[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]A very local resident[/bold] wrote: Thank you Ben for having the voice of reason in this silly debate where people from outside of Epping seem to think they have an overriding opinion of what should happen on this site. I would like to ask if anyone has consulted any of the residents of Thornwood Road - what do they think![/quote] Everyone has a right of opinion and whilst I work in Chingford I live in Epping Green so regardless I have a right to say what I think. More homes are needed - I think it is a good thing[/quote] And how much longer will it remain green with a daft mare like you living there?
Chingford United Netball Team wrote:
A very local resident wrote: Thank you Ben for having the voice of reason in this silly debate where people from outside of Epping seem to think they have an overriding opinion of what should happen on this site. I would like to ask if anyone has consulted any of the residents of Thornwood Road - what do they think!
Everyone has a right of opinion and whilst I work in Chingford I live in Epping Green so regardless I have a right to say what I think. More homes are needed - I think it is a good thing
And how much longer will it remain green with a daft mare like you living there?
Posted by: Justin Simpson on 6:20pm Mon 26 May 08
What I don't understand is that the old petrol station in Epping Green got turned in to family homes (houses), yet Epping has to have yet more flats, which there isn't real demand for! Why can't Epping have family homes too?
What I don't understand is that the old petrol station in Epping Green got turned in to family homes (houses), yet Epping has to have yet more flats, which there isn't real demand for! Why can't Epping have family homes too?
Posted by: Ben Murphy, Epping on 2:03pm Tue 27 May 08
The obvious answer to Jusin Simpson's question is that you can earn more money from flats as you can usually fit more units into the space available.
Ultimately, this will always boil down to money. Developers will build whatever they believe will create the biggest profit margin for themselves.
The obvious answer to Jusin Simpson's question is that you can earn more money from flats as you can usually fit more units into the space available.
Ultimately, this will always boil down to money. Developers will build whatever they believe will create the biggest profit margin for themselves.
Posted by: Peter Knight on 3:19pm Tue 27 May 08
Can't County put a limit on the amount of flats that can be built in Epping?
After all any more and Epping will no longer be rural or home to any families. Surely they could implement a limit on grounds that many more flats will permanently change the character of Epping and alter the social fabric / demographic.
I understand that under the East of England plans historic market towns like Epping are meant to have “town health check” to insure their character is not changed for the worse by new build, where’s Epping’s?
Can't County put a limit on the amount of flats that can be built in Epping?
After all any more and Epping will no longer be rural or home to any families. Surely they could implement a limit on grounds that many more flats will permanently change the character of Epping and alter the social fabric / demographic.
I understand that under the East of England plans historic market towns like Epping are meant to have “town health check” to insure their character is not changed for the worse by new build, where’s Epping’s?
Posted by: Ben Murphy, Epping on 5:14pm Tue 27 May 08
Peter, unfortunately, no County can't put a limit on the number of flats that can be built in Epping. We are all aware that the Government are hell-bent on building more housing units and Epping will clearly be effected. We will fight were we can and try to ensure a just balance.
Peter, unfortunately, no County can't put a limit on the number of flats that can be built in Epping. We are all aware that the Government are hell-bent on building more housing units and Epping will clearly be effected. We will fight were we can and try to ensure a just balance.
Posted by: Mr Khalid, walthamstow on 12:26pm Wed 28 May 08
all parson need some wheres to live and this good idea but also must make more staton for to get the patrols
all parson need some wheres to live and this good idea but also must make more staton for to get the patrols
Posted by: Nikki Paine on 6:44pm Wed 28 May 08
I personally think Epping's conservation area should be widened, by doing this you make sure any new developments are in keeping and of a certain quality, not like that rubbish Bellway wants to build.
I personally think Epping's conservation area should be widened, by doing this you make sure any new developments are in keeping and of a certain quality, not like that rubbish Bellway wants to build.
Posted by: Dennis Lyons on 3:37pm Thu 29 May 08
[quote][bold]Nikki Paine[/bold] wrote:
I personally think Epping's conservation area should be widened, by doing this you make sure any new developments are in keeping and of a certain quality, not like that rubbish Bellway wants to build.[/quote] Unfortunately, this won't happen as the people in charge don't give a **** about Epping, just money!
Just look at the planned 'Bellway Estate' would/could such plans be put forward if the people in charged cared about Epping!
Like someone else commented, why does Epping Green get houses on their old petrol station but the more populated Epping gets flats, money! Everyone wins, Council (more council tax), developers (more profit), only people that don't are Epping residents!
Nikki Paine wrote:
I personally think Epping's conservation area should be widened, by doing this you make sure any new developments are in keeping and of a certain quality, not like that rubbish Bellway wants to build.
Unfortunately, this won't happen as the people in charge don't give a **** about Epping, just money!
Just look at the planned 'Bellway Estate' would/could such plans be put forward if the people in charged cared about Epping!
Like someone else commented, why does Epping Green get houses on their old petrol station but the more populated Epping gets flats, money! Everyone wins, Council (more council tax), developers (more profit), only people that don't are Epping residents!
Posted by: Dennis Lyons on 3:39pm Thu 29 May 08
Unfortunately, this won't happen as the people in charge don't give a **** about Epping, just money!
Just look at the planned 'Bellway Estate' would/could such plans be put forward if the people in charged cared about Epping!
Like someone else commented, why does Epping Green get houses on their old petrol station but the more populated Epping gets flats, money! Everyone wins, Council (more council tax), developers (more profit), only people that don't are Epping residents!
Unfortunately, this won't happen as the people in charge don't give a **** about Epping, just money!
Just look at the planned 'Bellway Estate' would/could such plans be put forward if the people in charged cared about Epping!
Like someone else commented, why does Epping Green get houses on their old petrol station but the more populated Epping gets flats, money! Everyone wins, Council (more council tax), developers (more profit), only people that don't are Epping residents!
Posted by: Simon Weekes-Hughes, Epping, Essex on 8:49pm Thu 29 May 08
What I find interesting is that the 46 'key worker' flats due to be built on the St. Margaret's site aren't going to be built due to lack of interest!
Slowly we are seeing that the 'demand' for flats in Epping is much different from the real demand, just because a developer says there is a demand, doesn't mean there is!
What I find interesting is that the 46 'key worker' flats due to be built on the St. Margaret's site aren't going to be built due to lack of interest!
Slowly we are seeing that the 'demand' for flats in Epping is much different from the real demand, just because a developer says there is a demand, doesn't mean there is!
Posted by: Ben Murphy, Epping on 11:54am Fri 30 May 08
[quote][bold]Dennis Lyons[/bold] wrote:
Unfortunately, this won't happen as the people in charge don't give a **** about Epping, just money! Just look at the planned 'Bellway Estate' would/could such plans be put forward if the people in charged cared about Epping! Like someone else commented, why does Epping Green get houses on their old petrol station but the more populated Epping gets flats, money! Everyone wins, Council (more council tax), developers (more profit), only people that don't are Epping residents![/quote] Dennis,
I entirely disagree, as I am sure you would expect!
The Bellway Homes development at St. Margaret's Hospital is clearly being taken out of context.
As previously stated on ths website and in a vast range of correspondence I have received on this matter, as the Mayor of Epping I sit as an ex-officio member of the Town Council's committees, including the planning and general purposes committee. This committee is a statutory consultee on all planning applications, so it basically has the opportunity to recommend an outcome to the planning authority which is Epping Forest District Council, but objections and recommendations must be made in legal planning terms, as set out by the Government's Inspectorate of Planning.
The official recommendation from the Town Council was:
"Committee strongly objected to this application. It was felt that this was an overdevelopment, and that there should be more family housing and less flats within a more natural environment. It was also felt that there could be problems with the access route. The plans as presented were extremely unsocial except for one small area to the front bordering with B181. Committee also felt that the infrastructure was not in place were this to proceed.
Committee highlighted another area of Epping (Theydon Grove) where the outcome of the development had been well thought out. They felt that the opportunity for a flagship development in character with the town in this part of Epping had been lost."
I honestly don't believe your commments that "those in charge" don't care are justified. We are doing all we can and working closely with the 'Plaining Say No' campaigners.
We must ensure that this development is in keeping with our surroundings, but we can ONLY onject on the guidelines issued by the Government.
I am happy to correspond with you more throroughly on this issue if you wish to do so directly.
Dennis Lyons wrote:
Unfortunately, this won't happen as the people in charge don't give a **** about Epping, just money! Just look at the planned 'Bellway Estate' would/could such plans be put forward if the people in charged cared about Epping! Like someone else commented, why does Epping Green get houses on their old petrol station but the more populated Epping gets flats, money! Everyone wins, Council (more council tax), developers (more profit), only people that don't are Epping residents!
Dennis,
I entirely disagree, as I am sure you would expect!
The Bellway Homes development at St. Margaret's Hospital is clearly being taken out of context.
As previously stated on ths website and in a vast range of correspondence I have received on this matter, as the Mayor of Epping I sit as an ex-officio member of the Town Council's committees, including the planning and general purposes committee. This committee is a statutory consultee on all planning applications, so it basically has the opportunity to recommend an outcome to the planning authority which is Epping Forest District Council, but objections and recommendations must be made in legal planning terms, as set out by the Government's Inspectorate of Planning.
The official recommendation from the Town Council was:
"Committee strongly objected to this application. It was felt that this was an overdevelopment, and that there should be more family housing and less flats within a more natural environment. It was also felt that there could be problems with the access route. The plans as presented were extremely unsocial except for one small area to the front bordering with B181. Committee also felt that the infrastructure was not in place were this to proceed.
Committee highlighted another area of Epping (Theydon Grove) where the outcome of the development had been well thought out. They felt that the opportunity for a flagship development in character with the town in this part of Epping had been lost."
I honestly don't believe your commments that "those in charge" don't care are justified. We are doing all we can and working closely with the 'Plaining Say No' campaigners.
We must ensure that this development is in keeping with our surroundings, but we can ONLY onject on the guidelines issued by the Government.
I am happy to correspond with you more throroughly on this issue if you wish to do so directly.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
