Village rejoices as inspector rejects estate of 168 homes in Stansted
Developer Bloor Homes has lost its appeal to be allowed to build 168 homes on farmland to the north of Stansted – to the delight of campaigners opposed to the scheme who fought “a David and Goliath battle”.
As news broke on Tuesday (Sept 21) of the Government planning inspector’s decision following a public inquiry, Save Stansted Village (SSV) chairman Jamie Hogg declared: “We’ve beaten them again, it’s fantastic news!”
The community effort to stave off the threat of development was labelled nothing short of astonishing by district and parish councillor Geoffrey Sell, whose Stansted North ward was in the firing line.
Donations to fund the legal fight had topped £22,000, including £4,000 from the parish council, while more than 1,300 objections had been received by planning authority Uttlesford District Council (UDC), which refused permission, sparking Bloor’s appeal.
“I’m drinking elderflower at this moment but I think it should be something stronger!” said Cllr Sell.
“This vindicates the decision by Uttlesford planners to refuse planning permission. It also vindicates the work of SSV and the parish council and all those residents who said ‘no’.
“Sometimes David does win against Goliath and I hope for the foreseeable future that this part of Stansted will be a no-go area to developers.”
Fellow Stansted district councillor Ayub Khan said commonsense had prevailed.
It was SSV’s second success at appeal having defeated Taylor Wimpey’s plans for the site, which borders the protected Pennington Lane, in 2013.
Stansted district councillor Alan Dean said: “I want to express my sincere thanks to Gail and Jamie Hogg, Simon Thompson, Liz Lake, Peter Jones and all the other workers and supporters of the SSV campaign team for their unstinting dedication and professionalism in fighting this opportunistic attempt to encroach on the Stort Valley and even in future to put the Metropolitan Green Belt at risk.
“The district council, parish council, community groups and individual residents worked together, backed by sound, logical arguments and they were proved right. Well done, everyone!”
In announcing his decision, Inspector Jonathan Price said: “I have found that the development proposed would have a substantial adverse landscape and visual impact, with corresponding harm to the character and appearance of the appeal site itself and the surrounding countryside.”