Bellway Public Consultation 7 Nov 2024 Ivy Chimneys School Response from the Epping Society
- Nov 18, 2024
- 3 min read
There is great doubt and suspicion about the validity of this Consultation. The whole area Master Plan (SEMPA) was put through such a process last Spring – but the results have still not yet been published. Nor have amended plans been released taking those views into account. When will the results of this process be made public?
The questionnaire describes the plan offered as “proposals”, but then later has “evolve where possible”. Implied is that the public are consulted, but Bellway decides what is possible. The public will feel this is not real public engagement, for community development and social enrichment.
The meeting was “lively”, with an apparent near-unanimously negative expression of feelings.
There were some contradictions on the displays – such as a whether a “school” or a “school site” – but this apparently depends on ongoing talks with ECC.
The footbridge will need attention, but no details were given at the event. However the questionnaire refers to a “new bridge for pedestrians and cycling across the railway line” – again no details.
Many people were not clear what new “direct links for walking and cycling to the station and the town” actually means. This sounds good, but what would these look like, where might these lie, and how be funded?
It is possibly encouraging to see “affordable” housing quoted as “up to 40%”; but the history is that EFDC allows developers to reduce this, claiming issues of feasibility. We note that Bellway’s turnover last year was £3bn.
The public were asked about types of housing. Probably small starter homes would be desirable, for local young families. However, surely though there are objective assessments of this need?
A new primary school – essential, or expand Ivy Chimneys (if possible); see above for confusion on this issue.
Other facilities needed but absent, but which were proposed in earlier versions of this plan – including medical, dental, retail, minibuses, community hub, improved bus & bus stop provision. Failure to carry through these provisions simply throws further stress on the existing community.
The amount of green spaces is nice, but they must be maintained long-term. Many pointed out that the present agricultural use already offers quite a lot of recreational opportunity. Meanwhile the local community will mourn the loss of a large informal playspace – the current recreation ground.
Designing houses to “match existing” is hard to understand, as Epping already has many styles.
Developers including Bellway seem to lack field experience. The idea of increasing cycling into the town is misleading – unfeasible and dangerous. Equally the reliance on the Central line for increased commuting is unrealistic – given existing and unresolvable issues of capacity, reliability and quality.
Drainage is a likely problem, local people and walkers spoke about regular and frequent floods. Someone said “it is called Brook Road for a reason” – so the proposed blue network should be regarded only as a pilot with modifications probably needed. The network of pools / ponds was met with questions of childrens’ safety, and insect infestations.
The display of strollers in the sunset under ancient trees had no relevance to this site.
The “green” measures are fine; but they are only some of what is expected in a global climate crisis.
There are huge concerns about access, this attracted much criticism. Only having one access point is ill-advised; the junction at Fluxes Lane is already difficult – there were several drawbacks with the plans showing a proposed redesign; the staff did not know about Coopersale Hall School’s increase in numbers, nor the industrial sites up the lane; the proposed zebra is in the wrong direction etc
Most importantly, all the feeder roads are narrow, crowded and some are already dangerous. There was no traffic assessment quoted of impacts on existing local roads, but developers cannot fail to be aware that this subject is a major issue of concern; one member of staff acknowledged this was a known serious problem. There was no proposed solution for these issues. Road pollution will increase, of special concern in roads through the Forest, while the Bell Common lights are already a hotspot.
The survey sheet asked how the “proposal” could be improved. Restoring the project to its previous promises would be a start. Improving access. Looking at traffic / pollution measures. The Epping Society suspects that these are not “possible evolutions”. Therefore the conclusions from our conversations is to build somewhere else; this is not NIMBYism, the Society simply wants the right developments, in the right places, with the right infrastructure – this is none of these.
Roger Lowry, ViceChair, the Epping Society, c/o Epping Hall, St John’s Road. www.eppingsociety.org
Comentarios