***PRESS RELEASE - 26th March, 2025 - Response to EFDC Cabinet Meeting - 19th March***
- Mar 26
- 3 min read
As per our website, we thought the endorsement of the Master Plan for South Epping (SEMPA) was a travesty of democracy and a betrayal of the clearly expressed wishes of a large majority of the residents consulted.
Issues to note:
The cost of the Public Consultation was requested by a speaker – with no reply. How many thousands of pounds were spent (by the developers, we think), then the outcome to be virtually ignored?
A Press Release (by EFDC – unsigned, 22 March), has “some residents strongly oppose”; but the Engagement Report gives the lie to “some” - a “huge majority” would be more accurate.
The chief proponent of the Plan on the Cabinet effectively dismissed the Public Voice, despite other Councillors pointing out that it was a sizeable and unusual response. Other Councillors have since publicly stated that they believe that public opinion should have been given more weight.
Far too many unknowns were left unresolved – crucially, still no traffic impact assessment, while negotiations with the County Council (school), NHS (medical provision off-site), Epping Forest Heritage Trust, Essex Highways etc are still ongoing. A promise was made to review the Infrastructure Development Plan – but that should have been available before approving this Plan, roads particularly being such a key issue.
The lead Councillor said there could still be small changes before the Plan is finalised, but Cabinet had to decide on a plan as presented to them. And just what are “small changes”? Who will scrutinise these?
The Plan was endorsed by Cabinet, but not voted on.
A promise was made to time the development, so that an informal play grass area (“kick about”) would be shuffled around, to preserve the facility. We hope this does in fact take place.
A speech made in Cabinet and the subsequent Press Release referred to “meeting the needs of local people”. This was a repeated litany in the Local Plan, but we believe this development will do little for local residents, especially the less well-off. The new housing is likely to be expensive – reduced numbers, difficult site, Section 106 costs - again – for local people?
This concern was further highlighted in the EFDC Release, when we learned that the 40% Affordable housing promise will probably be “much reduced” - another sweetener offered in the Consultation gone! We were told that there is precedent for such reductions being allowed; but on those two occasions assurances were given that a precedent was not being set. The Local Plan clearly called for 40% - and if the LP is so set in concrete, why can Council drop that part of it with apparently no conscience?
The Press Release tried to rationalise the delayed release for the Engagement Report, on the grounds that discussions were ongoing, but some of those discussions have still not been resolved. Just as importantly, the Council had previously published a schedule of dates for the process – “review” for August 2024, and the endorsement for Sept 2024; we made our FoI request in February 2025.
Also we feel that some Councillors may have lacked time to wade through the large documents, given the date of their release.
A question has been raised about the currency of some documents used. There is a suggestion that Cabinet endorsed a 2025 version of the plan, but the consultation was on a 2024 version. Councillors should possibly have had a 6-week review period, before the meeting. A query has been sent to the CEO of EFDC on this.
Finally, the Press Release urged residents to “continue showing their views”. This seems unlikely. The way DC have blatantly over-ridden public views will almost certainly trigger a “what is the point?” reaction; already being expressed on social media. The Epping Society continues to encourage all residents to keep abreast of the situation and take part in the next stages, as planning applications start to come in.
Roger Lowry, Christine Burt, the Epping Society
Comments