Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 Public Participation on Development Plan Document Development Strategy & Site Allocations January 2012

The Council would like your comments on the issues raised in this document. Please answer the questions in each section of the document.

How Can I Make My Comments?

You can make your comments in the following ways:

On Line

Please make your comments on-line. This is the most efficient way for the Council to deal with your representation – it speeds up the process of registering and considering your comments and makes sure that what you say is captured in full.

To register on the online system please go to or go to the website at www.uttlesford.gov.uk and follow the links.

By E-Mail or Letter If you would prefer to send a letter please make sure that you say which part of the document you are making comments on, whether you are objecting to or supporting that part of the plan, the reasons for your objection or support and the changes you would like to see.

The letter should be e-mailed to [email protected] or sent to the following address

Planning Policy Team Uttlesford District Council Council Offices London Road CB11 4ER

However you choose to make your comments they must be received by Monday 5 March 2012

If you have any questions please phone the Planning Policy Team on 01799 510461, 01799 510454 or 01799 510637

If you require this document in other language or in large print, Braille or other alternative format please contact 01799 510510

Page 1 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 1 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1

1. Introduction

The Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 is used to decide planning applications for development in Uttlesford. This plan is being replaced by a new style local plan which will be made up of three key elements:

• The Core Strategy Long term vision and objectives for the District and includes strategic policies to steer and shape development.

• Development Management Policies Detailed policies which the Council will use to determine planning applications. These policies will help to deliver the vision for the District.

• Site Allocations Sites needed to deliver the plan for the District. A policy will explain how the development will take place and identify requirements to be met. The sites will be shown on a map.

The District Council has already done a lot of work on the Core Strategy. The last consultation stage was Further Consultation on Preferred Options in February 2010 (all the material associated with the work on the Core Strategy is available on the Council’s website at www.uttlesford.gov.uk)

The Council consulted on a plan which was based on the Regional Spatial Strategy for the East of (known as the Plan); May 2008. This required in the order of 10,000 new homes to be built between 2001 and 2026. Taking into account the number of houses built since 2001 and also those given planning permission but still to be built, the Council needed to identify sites for 4000 new homes.

In 2007, supplemented by the further consultation in 2010, the Council consulted on 4 options 1. Development to be split between Saffron Walden, Great Dunmow and . 2. Development located over a hierarchy of settlements from the towns to the villages 3. Development located over a hierarchy of settlements from the towns to the villages but with significant development at Elsenham as the start of a new settlement. 4. Development of a new settlement to the north east of Elsenham with limited development in the towns and villages.

The Council’s preferred strategy for delivering the housing growth needed in the District was Option 4 - a new settlement between Elsenham and Henham.

Page 2 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 2 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1

2. What’s happening now?

The intention was to adopt the Core Strategy first and then the other two documents would be prepared together afterwards. Due to changes at national level and the fact that the Council has decided to review its housing targets the timetable has been amended. The Council is working on all parts of the document at the same time. The timetable (Local Development Scheme) for the preparation of all the documents is available on the Councils website. The key stages are set out below.

Pre Public Publication Submission Examination Adoption Submission Participation And Pre To Sec of Consultation On Submission State on Issues and Preferred Consultation Options Options Core Strategy

Development Jan/Feb June/July Oct/Nov March Management 2012 June 2013 Nov 2013 2012 2012 2013 Policies Site Allocations Jan/Feb Policies 2012

3. What is this consultation about?

• To propose a strategy for development and the roles of the towns, key villages and other smaller villages. • To look at available sites for development and find out if there are any other available sites • To find out if any minor changes to Development Limits need to be made. • To identify sites for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Show-people.

Page 3 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 3 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 4. A strategy for development

This section asks for your views on a proposed strategy which distributes development over a number of settlements with most development in the two main towns and key villages. Small scale development in other settlements may also be considered suitable.

In proposing this strategy the Council has looked at a number of changes which have taken place at national and local level; the response to past consultation; and the role of settlements of different sizes in the District.

Since the end of the last public consultation in April 2010 there have been a number of changes to consider. 1. The Coalition Government has passed the Localism Act which will enable the East of England Plan to be withdrawn giving the Council responsibility for setting housing and employment growth targets. 2. The Environment Committee on 7 September 2010 resolved to review the scale and location of housing growth appropriate for Uttlesford. 3. In May 2011 a legal decision was issued which said that until the Regional Plans had been fully withdrawn it would be illegal for the Council to proceed with a Core Strategy which was not based on East of England Plan figures. 4. The Council, working with other Districts in Essex and adjoining Counties, have commissioned consultants to prepare a range of population, household and labour force forecasts to support its plan preparation. 5. In July 2011 the Government published its Draft National Planning Policy Framework which proposes a presumption in favour of sustainable development. Local plans need to be in place as soon as practical because in the absence of an up-to-date and consistent plan, Government Guidance is that planning applications should be determined in accord with the National Framework, including its presumption in favour of sustainable development. 6. The increasing housing need in the District is because people are living and working longer which reduces the turn over of housing stock for new home owners. Uttlesford benefits from being an attractive place to live and there is therefore competition for houses which in the long run pushes the prices up beyond the reach of many younger people. The Council is required to provide sufficient houses to meet the identified need which includes migration. About 74% of the growth in population is estimated to come from people moving into the District from elsewhere in Britain, with 13% through natural change (i.e. births and deaths) and 13% from international migration. Furthermore the size of households is getting smaller with significant increases in single person households and couples with no children. This increases pressure for additional homes. Building houses in the District will increase the supply of housing to help meet the future demand and ensures the provision of affordable houses.

These changes give the Council an opportunity to review its strategy.

Page 4 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 4 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 In considering a development strategy for the District, the Council is taking into account the response to past consultation; and the role of settlements of different sizes in the District.

Response to past consultations

The common response to previous consultations is clear: a preference towards housing being dispersed across the District.

In April 2006 one of the actions, proposals and policies which had consensus of the participants was that Key villages should absorb some new housing to secure additional facilities.

In June 2006 most people preferred sites for new homes to be found in larger villages which have access to shop(s), school and railway station, and within Saffron Walden, Great Dunmow and Stansted Mountfitchet.

In January 2007 most people favoured development distributed over a range of settlements.

In November 2007 when the 4 options were consulted on, each option found support and opposition.

The February 2010 consultation on the preferred Option 4 attracted considerable opposition. Residents and service providers were generally concerned about its deliverability in terms of the amount of infrastructure required, its sustainability and the environmental impact. It was considered that the proposal was of insufficient size to make services and facilities viable leading to an increase in journeys to nearby towns using an inadequate road network. It was considered that a passenger transport service was not viable leading to a reliance on the use of the car. There were also concerns about the ability for waste water from the new settlement to be adequately, economically and sustainably drained. There was also a worry that a strategy based on developing a new settlement places an over reliance on one location resulting in a lack of flexibility should circumstances change. The preferred alternative was for some form of wider distribution over a larger number of settlements.

The Role of Settlements in Uttlesford

A review of towns and villages indicates that the towns as the main service centres are suitable for larger scale development.

The facilities found in the key villages mean they are suitable for a scale of development that would reinforce their role as a provider of services to a wide rural area.

The smaller villages are suitable for a scale of development that would reinforce their role as a local service centre or as a provider of services to its own community.

Page 5 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 5 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 In reviewing its strategy the Council considers it important to look at the evidence at the settlement level, looking at the two market towns, Saffron Walden and Great Dunmow and the villages which were identified as “key villages” in the previous consultation because of the level of services which are available in them.

The key settlements are:- • Elsenham • Newport • Takeley • Great Chesterford • Stansted Mountfitchet • Thaxted • Hatfield Heath

Profiles for each of these settlements have been prepared and are available on the website and Council Offices . Each profile includes details about housing, employment, infrastructure and transport, minerals and waste, the historic environment and green infrastructure.

The Council has used the information in the profiles to identify issues and opportunities. Appendix 1 summarises the opportunities and key issues that have been identified for each of the settlements.

Saffron Walden is the administrative and commercial centre of the District but has limited infrastructure such as road, school and sewage capacity; and it is a town of exceptionally high environmental quality. Great Dunmow is a smaller yet still attractive market town with similar infrastructure issues as Saffron Walden but has good access to the strategic road network. Development in either settlement therefore has to be of a scale to provide new infrastructure yet maintain the quality of the environment.

Great Chesterford, Newport, Elsenham and Stansted Mountfitchet benefit from local facilities and railway stations. However, issues do exist in these villages such as limited capacity at Great Chesterford Primary School; traffic issues near to Newport Grammar School; limited community centre provision in Elsenham; and protecting the Metropolitan Green Belt to the south of Stansted Mountfitchet. Takeley has good access to the strategic road network and existing capacity in the sewerage network but lacks facilities such as a surgery. Thaxted provides facilities for the surrounding villages but there is limited local employment. Hatfield Heath is constrained by the Metropolitan Green Belt.

To decide on the location and scale of development, a hierarchy based on the level of facilities available in each village has been produced. Below the market towns and key villages there are a large number of settlements and this category has been sub divided into villages with a primary school and those without. Although Hatfield Heath has facilities corresponding with Key Villages, it is constrained by the Metropolitan Green Belt. The Council is not proposing to change the Metropolitan Green Belt boundary. The scale of development in Hatfield Heath is therefore limited to within Development Limits and Rural Exception Housing.

Page 6 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 6 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1

Table 2: Suggested Settlement Hierarchy Function Settlement Market Towns Major focus for development in the Great Dunmow district – suitable for larger scale Saffron Walden development. Key Villages Main focus for development in the Elsenham rural area – suitable for a scale of Great Chesterford development that would reinforce role Hatfield Heath as a provider of services to a wide Newport rural area. Stansted Mountfitchet (including Foresthall Park) Takeley/Little Canfield Thaxted Rural Settlements – Type A Village with primary school with some Ashdon Hatfield Broad Oak local services e.g. village Birchanger Henham hall/pub/shop - suitable for a scale of Chrishall Leaden Roding development that would reinforce role Clavering Little Hallingbury as a local service centre. Debden Manuden Farnham Quendon and Felsted Rickling Flitch Green Radwinter Great Easton Stebbing Great Sampford Wimbish

Rural Settlements - Type B Village without primary school but Arkesden Langley with some local services e.g. e.g. Aythorpe Roding Lindsell village hall/pub/shop – suitable for a Barnston Littlebury scale of development that would Berden Little Canfield reinforce role as a provider of Broxted Little Easton services mainly to its own community. Elmdon Little Dunmow Great Canfield Ugley Great Hallingbury Wendens Ambo Hadstock Wicken Bonhunt Hempstead Widdington High Easter White Roding High Roding

Small villages and hamlets Not suitable for further development All other settlements unless it functionally requires a rural location as set out in policy.

5. As a result of the previous consultation responses, an evaluation of the existing settlement hierarchy and the responsibility given to the Council to determine a sound level of growth the Council is proposing a strategy

Page 7 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 7 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 based on a variation of Option 2 which was ‘Development located over a hierarchy of settlements from the towns to the villages’:

Proposed Strategy Development is distributed over a number of settlements with most development in the two main towns and key villages. Small scale development in other settlements may also be considered suitable.

QUESTIONS: 1. Do you agree with this strategy – Yes/No 2. If No – then please explain why. 3. Please explain which alternative you prefer

Page 8 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 8 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 5. Which sites could provide development to meet this strategy?

This section includes a series of maps identifying sites submitted by land owners and developers to the Council for possible development. Identification of a site does not mean that the Council considers it appropriate for development. Your views are being sought on which sites you think are suitable for development and which are not.

The Council carried out a Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) as it is required to do. The SHLAA identifies sites; assess their potential for housing development, the potential quantity of housing; when they could be developed; and any constraints to development. Details of all the sites considered in the SHLAA are available on the website .

It is important to remember that the SHLAA provides evidence to support decision making. Identification of a site does not mean that the Council considers it appropriate for development.

Market Towns and Key Villages The maps identify the sites included in the SHLAA. Each site is referenced with the first 3 letters of the settlement (not necessarily the Parish) and a number. The number indicates the number of dwellings the site could accommodate at a density of 30 dwelling per hectare. This is a similar density to St Marys View (off Little Walden Road) Saffron Walden; Lukins Drive (off Ongar Road), Great Dunmow; and Pine Avenue, Larch Way, Cedar Close on Woodlands Park, Great Dunmow.

The development of larger sites could include amenity greenspace; sports provision; schools; employment land etc within their boundary.

A number of sites have also been submitted for employment use. In addition, the Employment Land Review 2011 identified 2 areas of search for potential employment use centred on Newport Railway Station and Audley End Railway Station. These sites and areas of search are identified on the maps.

Rural Settlements Types A and B

The SHLAA includes an assessment of sites in the smaller villages. These are shown in the SHLAA available on the Council’s website . The council want to know which sites you think are suitable for small scale development and which are not.

Settlements with primary school and with some local services e.g. village hall/pub/shop have been identified as being suitable for a scale of development that would reinforce the role as a local service centre. Smaller villages are seen as suitable for a scale of development that would reinforce their role as a provider of services mainly to its own community.

Residents may consider that a small scale of development may benefit a village by bringing new people into the village to support facilities. New

Page 9 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 9 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 housing can allow people to remain in the village but move into a smaller or larger house releasing their house for families or first time buyers.

QUESTIONS: 4. Please identify any other sites not already considered which you consider appropriate for housing or employment. It is important to provide a map identifying the site.

When answering the following questions please identify the site you are talking about by using the reference e.g. GtDUN01. 5. Which sites might be acceptable for development?

6. What do you think the site should be used for? If you think the site should be developed for more than one use, please tick as many as you think appropriate.

Residential Employment Retail Other Please specify

7. What additional facilities would you like to see included in the development. Please tick as many as you think appropriate.

Open space Sports provision School Community hall Allotments Road improvements Other Please specify

8. Are there any sites which should not be considered for development?

9. Please explain why.

[If viewing the CMIS version of this report, please refer to the separate pdf showing site maps.]

Page 10 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 10 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 Amendments to Development Limits

The Council is not proposing to amend development limits other than for sites eventually allocated. However, you are being asked whether there any locations where the Development Limits should be amended to include or exclude parcels of land.

Not only will the Local Plan identify specific sites for development it will identify Development Limits around towns and villages.

Defining Development Limits around settlements has worked well in the past and is strongly supported by local communities. Development Limits protect the countryside from encroachment. Beyond Development Limits there is a strict control over development, whilst within Development Limits appropriate development complying with other Plan policies will normally be permitted. Development Limits also have a role in protecting the character of settlements and especially the village edges where countryside meets the built environment. These transition zones are often characterised by low density development. Development Limits are therefore often drawn to exclude backland locations and ribbon development to avoid encouraging development in unsuitable locations which would detrimentally alter the character of the settlement.

The Development Limits as shown in the 2005 Adopted Local Plan have been drawn to follow boundaries on the ground, to make interpretation as easy as possible. However, where there are for example houses on the edge of settlements with large gardens, Development Limits relate to existing buildings rather than garden boundaries, where the latter would allow for inappropriate development.

The Council is proposing to keep the Development Limits as currently adopted ad this retains a degree of certainty for residents. However, you are being asked whether there any locations where the Development Limits should be amended to include or exclude parcels of land.

QUESTION. 10. Are there any locations where the Development Limits should be amended to include or exclude a small parcel of land? Please provide a map identifying the site and where the Development Limit should be drawn and explain why the Limit should be amended.

Page 11 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 11 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 6. Sites for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Show people

The Council is required to allocate additional sites for gypsies, travellers and travelling show people and is asking you to identify specific suitable sites.

The Council is required to provide sites for gypsies; travellers and travelling show people based on a robust evidence of local need. In the District there is currently 1 socially rented gypsy and traveller site owned by Essex County Council providing 17 pitches (which can accommodate 35 caravans); 15 private permanent sites with planning permission providing accommodation for 34 caravans, and 1 site with temporary permission which can accommodate 5 caravans.

The Essex Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (Fordham Research; 2009) suggests that in Uttlesford 24 permanent pitches and 7 short stay pitches and 2 additional plots for travelling show people will be required between 2008 and 2021.

Since April 2008 planning permission has been granted for a site in Great Canfield and a temporary consent for 5 caravans on a site in Little Hallingbury.

The Council is required to identify enough sites for 15 years from adoption of the plan in 2013 and to identify specific deliverable sites for the first 5 years. The Council will need to review the target post 2021.

Only two sites have so far been suggested where the promoter of the site had an interest in the land at Watch House Green, Felsted and Arkesden Road, Wicken Bonhunt.

The Council are looking for sites which are: • located to minimise any impact on the natural, built and historic environment. • have safe vehicular access to and from the public highway and allow for parking, turning and servicing of vehicles on site. • not located within areas at risk of flooding. • capable of being provided with drainage, water supply and other necessary utility services. • of an appropriate size to provide the planned number of caravans together with amenity blocks, play areas, access roads and structural landscaping. • the plots for travelling show-people should be large enough for the storage and maintenance of rides and equipment.

QUESTION: 11. With reference to the above criteria please identify any sites which would be suitable as gypsy, traveller or travelling show-people sites.

Page 12 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 12 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1

QUESTION 12. Do you have any other general comments about the issues raised in this consultation?

Page 13 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 13 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1

Appendix 1: Opportunities and Key Issues for the Market Towns and Key Villages

SAFFRON WALDEN Saffron Walden has/is :- Key Issues: a. a high quality, historic built 1. determining the location, character environment making an attractive and scale of growth whilst still market town within a rural setting; maintaining the quality of the b. potential to develop Tourism; environment; c. an administrative and commercial 2. the provision of adequate centre of District; “affordable” housing to meet local d. an attractive shopping centre with needs; low vacancy rates, good range of 3. potential loss of employment land independent and high street to residential development; stores and twice weekly market; 4. industrial estates do not meet e. good access to green space modern day requirements of large within/adjoining the town centre national firms resulting in surplus e.g. the common, Bridge End buildings; Gardens etc; 5. shortage of good quality office f. a motivated community with focus accommodation; on making things happen, e.g. 6. competition from nearby centres saffron screen, skate park etc like Cambridge and Haverhill; g. Audley End station giving rail 7. access to the M11 motorway at access to London and nearest junction is limited to Cambridge; southward bound only; h. a range of sites have been 8. railway station at Audley End is submitted which could come remote from town centre and public forward within the plan period. transport and footpath and cycle links are poor; 9. traffic congestion leading to poor air quality at key junctions; 10. sewerage infrastructure capacity is very limited; 11. localised flooding incidents; 12. there is very limited spare capacity in the existing state schools; 13. the population is likely to feature an increasing proportion of the elderly which will have particular needs; 14. shortage of play space.

GREAT DUNMOW Great Dunmow has/is:-: Key Issues: a. a small, attractive market town 1. determining the location, character with strong sense of community; and scale of growth whilst still b. within 20 mins travel time of other maintaining the quality of the centres like Chelmsford, environment;

Page 14 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 14 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 Braintree and Bishops Stortford; 2. traffic issues on the High Street; c. easy access to main strategic 3. competing with nearby centres for route network via A120; retail and other services; d. potential for spin off effects from 4. shortage of open space in some tourism at the airport e.g. people parts of the town; stopping off between flights etc; 5. limited spare capacity in primary e. a range of sites have been schools; submitted which could come 6. potential loss of employment land forward within the plan period. to residential development; 7. provision of Civic Amenity Site.

ELSENHAM Elsenham has:-: Key Issues: a. a railway station (but capacity 1. limited capacity for additional and timetabling issues); Waste Water Treatment; b. local facilities available within the 2. under provision of amenity & village; natural/semi natural greenspace; c. a range of sites have been 3. Poor/limited community centre submitted which could come provision; forward within the plan period. 4. protection of Alsa Wood /potential for public access; 5. no new affordable housing being provided.

GREAT CHESTERFORD Great Chesterford has:-: Key Issues: a. a high quality built environment; 1. no new affordable housing being b. significant historic interest; delivered; c. a railway station; 2. no capacity at primary school with d. a range of sites have been limited potential to expand; submitted which could come 3. need to maintain and encourage forward within the plan period. employment opportunities; 4. no allotments.

HATFIELD HEATH Hatfield Heath has:-: Key Issues: a. a range of sites have been 1. level of development for which submitted which could come there is potential scope would forward within the plan period; undoubtedly change character of b. opportunity to provide necessary village, the main aspects of which facilities to accompany this level are the large green and general of development. openness outside centre as a consequence of large houses on road frontage often set well back from it; 2. a significant level of development would mean building in the Green

Page 15 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 15 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 Belt. This would either need to be justified as very special circumstances or there would need to be a change to the Green Belt boundary (which is opposed by the parish council).

NEWPORT Newport has/is:-: Key Issues: a. an attractive village with strong 1. traffic issues - conflicts around community spirit; secondary school and through b. a railway station (although may High Street; be timetabling and capacity 2. need to maintain and encourage issues); local employment opportunities in c. a quality parish council with the village; experience of partnership working 3. sewerage network capacity issues; to deliver successfully affordable 4. some localised flooding; housing schemes; 5. need to protect and enhance d. a parish council which supports conservation and historic assets; some growth in village homes 6. lack of amenity and natural/semi subject to local services; natural greenspace e. a parish council committed to 7. additional allotments needed. participate in Neighbourhood Planning; f. a range of sites have been submitted which could come forward within the plan period.

STANSTED MOUNTFITCHET Stansted Mountfitchet has/is:-: Key Issues: a. a rich historic built environment. 1. protection of Green Belt b. tourism potential around castle; surrounding much of village; c. a railway Station (although may 2. delivery of affordable housing; be capacity and timetabling 3. issues with secondary schooling, issues); i.e. no sixth form, resulting in cross d. active community with wide range boundary travel to schools in East of local organisations and Hertfordshire; interests; 4. shopping split between two e. a quality Parish Council separate areas of village; Committed to participate in 5. need to identify site for new health Neighbourhood Planning; centre; f. a range of sites have been 6. limited capacity on sewage submitted which could come network (70-85 homes) and forward within the plan period; treatment works (200 homes); g. support in Parish Plan for 8 7. River Stort is UK Biodiversity housing sites providing 166-267 Action Plan habitat currently failing new homes. to comply with Water Framework Directive;

Page 16 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 16 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 8. some localised flood risk; 9. heavy traffic on the B1383 through the centre of the village; 10. lack of natural/semi natural greenspace; 11. additional land needed for allotments.

TAKELEY Takeley has: Key Issues: a. access to transport hub at the 1. lack of facilities e.g. shops, doctors airport; surgery; b. an existing capacity in sewerage 2. proximity to airport – noise and network for some additional visual impact; housing growth; 3. protection of Airport Countryside c. an existing network of footpaths Protection Zone; (Harcamlow Way, Three Forests 4. no allotments. Way), corridors (Flitch Way) and features (Hatfield Forest) which are important for recreation, biodiversity and tourism and could be developed and linked; d. a range of sites have been submitted which could come forward within the plan period.

THAXTED Thaxted has: Key Issues: a. exceptional environmental quality 1. protection of high quality with architectural and historic environment; interest of national importance; 2. impact of new development on b. tourism potential with historic built historic environment; environment and special events 3. because of the quality of the e.g. Morris Weekend, Thaxted historic centre any development is Festival; most likely to take place on the c. a range of sites have been edge of or approaches to the submitted which could come village – any development needs to forward within the plan period; protect important views of the d. parish council support for a Church and the Windmill both from number of potential deliverable within the village and in the wider sites. landscape; 4. concerns about lack of local employment; 5. limited waste water treatment capacity; 6. some localised flood risk.

Page 17 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 17 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 Appendix 2 i) Market Towns Settlement Site reference and location Capacity SAF2 - Land at Hospital 21 Saffron SAF3 – 119-121 Radwinter Road 79 Walden SAF4 - Land south of Radwinter Road, East of 734 Shire Hill SAF6 - Land south of Rylstone Way 180 SAF7 - North east of civic amenity site 65 SAF8 - Land R/O leisure centre, Thaxted Road 176 SAF11 - Land at Herberts Farm 270 SAF13 – Ashdon Road Commercial Centre, 184 Ashdon Road Great GtDUN01 - Rear of former Bardfield House, The 12 Dunmow Broadway, Church End GtDUN02 - Land south and West of Great 598 Dunmow – land north and south of B1256 and north of Flitch Way GtDUN02 - Land south west of Great Dunmow - 880 land south of Flitch Way GtDUN03 - South of Ongar Road 90 GtDUN04 - Ongar Road Trading Estate 41 GtDUN05 -Land north of Ongar Road 68 GtDUN08 - Land at Brick Kiln Farm (1) 24 GtDUN09 - Land at Brick Kiln Farm (2) 59 GtDUN10 - Land north of Woodlands Park 135 GtDUN11 - Staggs Farm, Stortford Road 122 GtDUN12 - Dunmow Park 158 GtDUN13 - Land to the west of Great Dunmow 990 GtDUN14 - Land west of B184, Chelmsford 180 Road GtDUN15 - Land East of St Edmunds Lane 149 GtDUN19 - Land south of B1256 and 48 GtDUN20 - South of Tower House 31 GtDUN23 - Land at Tiggers 14 GtDUN25 - Off Riverside 8 GtDUN30 - Council Depot, New Street 10 GtDUN32 - Land associated with Herb of Grace 11 GtDUN33 - Land at Brick Kiln and Oaklands 35 GtDUN34 - Field adj to the Parsonage, 16 Parsonage Downs GtDUN36 - Land east of Beaumont Hill 450

Page 18 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 18 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 ii) Key Villages Settlement Site reference and location Capacity Elsenham ELS1 - Land south of Stansted Road 158 ELS2 - Land at Alsa Leys 6 ELS3 - Land north of the Crown Inn 35 ELS5 - Elsenham Nurseries/The Gables, 83 Stansted Road ELS6 - Land west of Station Road 248 ELS7 - Land off Robin Hood Road 16 ELS8 - Land North East of Elsenham (Strategic Scale Settlement) Elsenham and Henham 3,000 Parish ELS9 - Land south west of Hall Road 135 Great GtCHE1 - The Nursery, London Road 16 Chesterford GtCHE3 - Land south of Stanley Road, Rookery 52 Close and Four Acres GtCHE4 - Land off Station Approach 6 GtCHE5 Adjacent to Conway House/Poplar Lodge, 6 Newmarket Rd GtCHE6 - Land at Rose Lane 6 GtCHE7 - Land north of Great Chesterford 6,435 (Strategic Scale Settlement)() GtCHE8 - New World Timber, London Rd 11 Newport NEW1 - Chalk Farm Quarry 125 NEW2 - Land at London Road 74 NEW3 34 Land adj the Potteries, London Rd NEW4 - Land adjoining Wyndhams Croft, 51 Whiteditch Lane NEW5 - Burywater Nursery Whiteditch Lane 45 NEW6 - Land west of Whiteditch Lane 52 NEW7 - North of Burywater Lane and West of 203 Whiteditch Lane NEW9 - Land south and west of Newport 563 NEW10 and11 - West of School Lane 52 NEW12 - Carnation Nurseries, Cambridge Road 11 Stansted STA1 - Braefield Engineering High Lane 14 Mountfitchet STA02 - Land east of High Lane and north of the 88 Croft, High Lane STA5 - Water Lane 8 STA6 - Elms Farm 54

STA07 - Land at Elms Farm, Church Rd 196 STA8 - Land at Pines Hill 54 STA09 - Land to the west 1035 STA13 - Bentfield Bury Farm 169

Page 19 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 19 Development Strategy and site allocations consultation Cabinet, 20 December 2011, item 3 appendix 1 STA14 - Land north of Stansted, 338 Between Pennington Lane & B1383 STA15 - Land north of Catholic Church, High 32 Lane Takeley and TAK02 - Land North East of Takeley (Takeley 1913 Little and Little Canfield Parish) Canfield TAK03 - Land adj the White House 9 TAK04 - Land east of Takeley Mobile Home Park 518 (Gt Canfield Parish) TAK5 - Takeley Cricket Pitch 27 TAK06 - Land at Parsonage Lane 281 TAK07 - Land adj Highfield, Dunmow Road, 38 Takeley TAK08 - Hatfield Park Farm (part south of Flitch 472 Way) TAK08 - Hatfield Park Farm (Takeley & Hatfield 113 Broad Oak Parish) TAK09 - Scrap yard Adj Elm close 17 TAK10 - Hatfield Park Farm Pumping station 22 TAK11 - Land between 1 Coppice Close and 38 Hillcroft, Takeley Street TAK12 - Land between Gransmere and Montjoy, 19 Takeley Street TAK13 - Taylors Farm (1) Takeley Street 17 TAK14 - Taylors Farm (2) Takeley Street 46 TAK15 - Land to the south of B1256 Priors 19 Green TAK16 - Land at Former Takeley Service Station 11 Land between Ridge House and Remarc TAK17 - Bonningtons Farm (Hatfield Broad Oak 33 Parish) Lt CAN2 – Land at Frogs Hall Farm (Takeley and 608 Lt Canfield Parishes) Lt CAN3 – Former Canfield Service Station 4 Lt CAN4 – North View and 3 The Warren 49 Thaxted THA01 - Land south of Bardfield Road 45 THA02 - Land south of Bardfield Road 16 THA03 - Townfield 9 THA04 - Claypits Farm Buildings 22 THA05 - Molecular Products 24 THA06 - Land at Bolford Street 6 THA07 - Land at Chelmer House, The Drive 14 THA08 - Land at Watling Lane 119 THA11 - Sampford Road 248 THA12 - Land west of Guelphs Lane 43 THA14 - North of Barnards Fields 46 THA15 - Land east of Park Lane 24

Page 20 Item 3 appendix 1 / page 20