More proposals and more objections for more housing in Newhall
Business / Mon 19th Sep 2022 pm30 05:33pm
PLANS for up to 160 homes in Newhall are back in front of the Harlow Council planning committee.
Outline planning permission (OPP) has already been granted.
The OPP for Phase 2 of Newhall establishes the principle of development for 2,300
dwellings, including parkland and recreation, employment and a local centre envisaged to
grow into a neighbourhood centre.
Despite this, there has been a number of objections to the proposals:
The following concerns were raised:
• Lack of green space both within development site and generally across the whole of
• The application site should provide green space and out-door space for adjoining
existing occupiers as space is limited in Newhall
• Limited provision of trees, shrubs and hedges
• Insufficient parking spaces resulting in on street parking to the detriment of people
trying to use off street parking spaces
• Increased cars will cause congestion at school drop-off and pick-up times as there is
no parking for the existing school
• Public transport has yet to be provided on The Chase / High Chase
• Construction traffic should use separate road rather than a residential access
• Construction / works delivery times are not being met
• Unacceptable noise and dust during construction, especially for those working from
• Existing temporary (Heras) boundary fencing is broken and dangerous
• There are no amenities, pharmacies or GP surgeries
• Above issues reduce house prices / values
Click below to see full application.
The application is scheduled to be heard on Tuesday September 27th at 7.30pm at the civic offices.
Reading the application is illuminating. The comments of planning officers expose problem after problem after problem, poor cycle access, isolated development with no bus route, no or ridiculously small gardens (private amenity space), no social housing and at least one main road cutting through a green wedge. Rabbit hutch or more like factory poultry farming treatment of humans. Flats for singletons and only couples create mega problems especially when the outside recreational and green areas are severely limited and where what is provided is limited and under high human pressure also because people have children and find that impossible to afford to get out of what are purpose built maximum for future slums. Sir Fred had the right idea that could be extended ( as is used in developments like Eddington Cambridge) resident parking is all underground, add, as in more enlightened countries, cycling routes and bus transport are the major means of moving around. This plan kind of hopes that there might be a bus route and thinks cyclists might somehow find side roads to ride through, being down to Essex CC it's highly unlikely a rational plan will emerge. Better to insist the developers pay for a bus service, and for ebikes and scooters for hire at cost (their profits are more than adequate to do this). 1 cycle storage space per dwelling is ridiculously inadequate. Harlow needs a major eco park on this side of town and a conserved large woodland, Brenthall Woods have been totally trashed and this is a disgrace. Better use this land to support the environment and biodiversity. The plan also doesn't say how it will improve biodiversity, surely this is a mandatory requirement? The problem is that New Hall set out to be reflective of Canary wharf and high density living but Harlow was a well designed garden and country town that's progressively being ruined and especially since after 2000 when new lower standard higher density building practices and presumably regs kicked in. What is of greatest concern is that despite all of the major flaws in the proposed plan and the identification of so many "sub optimal" features the overall conclusion of the planners is to ignore their own concerns and to recommend the planning Committee pass this scheme.
Taken from pages 21/22 of planning officer's report. Dwellings split into 113 houses and 47 flats. Of the Houses: 4, 2-bed; 49, 3-bed and 60, 4-bed. The flats comprise 15, 1-bed and 32, 2-bed. There would be 24 affordable homes (15% of the total). There is still a very high proportion of larger, 4 bed, dwellings (38%), meaning the overall size mix is not particularly appropriate for local housing needs. Note: Harlow Local Development Plan guidance on size mix is 2% for 4-bed properties. Net density is low ‘suburban’, at 36 dwellings per hectare (160 dwellings on 4.14 Ha = 36.3 dph). This does not achieve best use of land or support HGGT sustainable travel objectives (more people living close to and underpinning viability of local facilities and bus services). Your guess is as good as mine why this is being given the green light by Harlow Council.
Key take aways: * the overall size mix is not particularly appropriate for local housing needs: * does not achieve best use of land or support HGGT sustainable travel objectives.
160 more homes? 160 plus people needing to register with a doctor? How many houses have been built in the last 10 years? How many doctors surgeries have opened to accommodate them ? You do the maths!
Completely spoilt over there now. The woods thrashed I used to walk my dogs through theses woods, it used to be so peaceful, so quite, and the miles of yellow fields , with the little farmers cottage right in the middle of theses fields, so so beautiful, now this cottage is surrounded with new builds. It's unbelievably wicked. Destroying a hole eco system. It's an eye sore now. And the next to be trashed will be the river stort valley. When do theses people say enough is enough, when we have no more peaceful places left . Churchgate Street now is surrounded. When is enough is enough. Then councils ect ect, harp on about mental health, you couldn't make this up. I know we need to house our people on waiting list, over 5OOO of them, but theses are not for our own in this town. Theses vanity project s are turning our town into a concrete monstrosity.