Eco-town Back in Uttlesford's Court as Paper says 'It Makes No Sense'

10.01.00pm GMT Mon 24th Nov 2008

There was something about last Tuesday's meeting of Uttlesford's environment committee that did not ring true, writes Alan Dean. The committee chairman admitted yet again that it was she who championed the idea of Option 4 in the September over a year ago. On Tuesday she said the future of the local development framework (LDF) preferred option rests in the hands of council officers and the study work that they have commissioned on topics such as access and biodiversity. What doesn't square with the real world is that technical consultants' studies usually come up with advice that suits the client's expectations; in this case Uttlesford's Conservative political masters. So what guidance has the Conservative administration at Uttlesford given? To confirm Option 4? To shift from Option 4? Or truly none at all?

Tuesday's committee meeting was one of those bizarre events that have become increasingly familiar at Uttlesford District Council. On a majority vote the committee welcomed without qualification the government's recent concession that it will not impose eco-towns. They must be part of the planning authority's own LDF proposals. The leader of the council said that the only reason that Uttlesford Conservatives have been opposed to an eco-town at North East Elsenham is because it would have been a central government imposition. The social and environmental damage to surrounding towns and villages that a brand new town would cause seemingly have been of no concern to the current administration.

So the ball is now firmly back in Uttlesford's court. And the conclusion must be that the council no longer opposes a local eco-town. If it doesn't switch away from new settlements and instead soon reverts to organic growth of existing towns and villages, its present course of action will lead to North East Elsenham under that or some other name.

• Targets for attack

In recent weeks the local Tory MP has said campaigners should attack the Government but not the Council and its Conservative councillors. It will be interesting to see what line he takes now that resolution of the matter is entirely in the hands of Conservative councillors.

• The Regional Plan

There was some discussion at the committee meeting about the revision to the regional plan that is now getting under way. The plan is being extended by ten years to 2031. We can be sure that there will be additional housing allocations to Uttlesford beyond the 4,200 not yet finally allocated by the current LDF exercise. So if Option 4 remains the council's preferred option at 3,000, there will soon be a larger allocation to boost it to 5,000 or beyond.

Moreover, while Option 4 remains the council's preferred option it sends a very strong message to the regional planners who are devising proposals for the update of the regional plan that Uttlesford encourages new settlements rather than gradual growth of existing town and villages. There is a lot of open countryside in Uttlesford, so the district may be seen as a place for much more significant growth than we have imagined to date. After all, it is easier to restrain overall housing growth through constrained growth of existing communities than it would be were there a free-for-all in the open countryside.

• It's not just Elsenham/Henham where 'It Make No Sense'

There are real prospects that housing floodgates will stay open unless the current Conservative administration closes them soon. Revised regional planning is gathering pace whilst Uttlesford's current LDF exercise seems set to plod along at least into 2010 before reaching a conclusion. By then the die may be cast.

No wonder the Dunmow and Stansted Observer led last Thursday with the headline "It Makes No Sense".