News

Traffic report funded by the Society sees Blunts Farm Appeal Dismissed

The Society helped fund, from members contributions, a traffic report by consultants for the Parish Council that has been instrumental in dismissing the planning appeal by Blunts Farm. This was for a change of use from agricultural use to B8 storage and associated development. (Original planning application EPF/1406/22).

Various commercial activities have been taking place on the site for some time. This application,had it have succeeded, would have meant significant additional road journeys along Coopersale lane by large vehicles such as lorries and vans.

Whilst we always believed it was inappropriate development in the Green Belt, we regarded the site as unsustainable. The road is dangerous for large vehicles given that Coopersale Lane is narrow and winding. It already suffers from frequent traffic congestion.  

The appeal was dismissed as the Inspector agreed that traffic sight lines along the road were not good enough to allow the development. He also concluded that Blunts could not improve the sight line as the land in question causing the issue was not in their ownership.

Government places Epping Forest District Council into planning special measures - What does this mean ?

On 15^th June Epping Forest District Council (EFDC), planning department, received notification that they had been placed into special measures for major planning applications. This results from EFDC breaking the Government’s 10 per cent limit on planning refusals being overturned at appeal. The 10 per cent measurement is somewhat historic being for the 2-year period to 31 March 2025.

Note in terms of our immediate concerns it does not mean the application (EPF/0354/26) for building 150 houses on the field along Abridge Road will be heard by the Planning Inspectorate. This will still follow the process at EFDC as it was commenced prior to the date that EFDC were placed into special measures.

The designation stays in effect until revoked by the Government.

Going forwards applicants making major planning applications (defined as developments of 10 or more homes or residential sites 0.5 hectares or larger, commercial development over 1,000 sq. m., or development on a site of 1 hectare or more) have a choice to either use the EFDC planning application route or to bypass that and go directly to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS). They can also choose to apply to the PINS for pre-application advice.

However, should an applicant choose to go via PINS they will lose their right of appeal. The decision is final. If they submit via EFDC they retain a right to appeal. EFDC retain a right to comment upon the application but this must occur within a strict 21-day period. This is somewhat concerning given statutory consultees were adding to the documents for application EPF/0354/26 for a couple of months after it was issued, and some of those comments would appear to favour refusal.

EFDC lose any planning fees should the applicant decide to go via PINS, but still have to undertake a significant amount of work, such as notifying the non-statutory consultees etc and making a recommendation for the decision to PINS . The Local plan also has to be provided to the inspectorate.

It should be noted the number of major applications received by EFDC is quite small being less than 10% of total applications. (The vast majority are householder applications). The number of appeals is also small, meaning that any decisions that are overturned have a reasonably significant impact in terms of going over the 10% limit.

Finally, it is also worth noting that all the authorities that have been given this special measures designation are in areas that have large amounts of Green Belt, National parks or areas of outstanding national beauty.

 

We do think that going forwards it will make it even harder to fight against development on the Green Belt, as we have a Government that it seems wants to build wherever they can, and for any refusal decision by EFDC they will be very nervous of it potentially being overturned on appeal.