Independent community information
Great Dunmow planning application UTT/26/1635/OP
Clear, independent information about the proposal for up to 850 homes at Church End. The evidence on roads, drainage, services, landscape and wildlife must be examined properly before any decision is made.
Church End at blue hour · community drone photograph
Latest official responses
The Environment Agency has issued a holding objection on ecological grounds and requires further evidence on matters including protected species, watercourses and long-term habitat management.
Stansted Airport's safeguarding authority has also issued a holding objection. It says that proposed ponds, wetlands and reed beds could create a bird-strike risk unless the design is changed or an effective Bird Hazard Management Plan is secured.
These are formal consultation responses. They need to be properly resolved before the application is decided.
Find the information you need
Short, focused pages explain the key issues in planning application UTT/26/1635/OP and help residents make their own informed comments.
Clear steps for using Uttlesford’s portal and writing a personal comment.
Local evidenceQuestions about culverts, downstream flooding and the River Chelmer.
Road safetyConstruction traffic, parking, access and the weight-restricted bridge.
NatureThe connected valley, River Chelmer corridor and unresolved ecology evidence.
NewsShort, searchable updates that can also be shared from Facebook.
Public recordRead the complete Save Church End objection library, including our latest national-policy submission.
Make it personalCreate an editable starting point based on the issue that matters to you.
What this campaign is asking for
We understand the need for new homes. The question is whether a development of this size can be safely and sustainably supported, and whether its promised infrastructure will arrive when people need it.
This site helps residents understand the main issues and make their own evidence-led comments. It does not replace the council’s official planning record.
Seven questions that need clear answers
Choose the subjects you know about. You do not need to cover everything.
The application must properly test construction traffic, day-to-day traffic, on-street parking, children’s safety and emergency access. The applicant’s busiest construction period could mean about 160 HGV movements a day. Church End Bridge also needs an agreed, evidence-based solution before permission—not after.
Residents need current, joined-up evidence about surface water, sewer capacity, river condition and downstream effects. Important questions raised with the authorities still need clear answers and enforceable safeguards.
The open valley separates Great Dunmow from Church End and contributes to the rural setting of St Mary’s Church. The proposal’s scale could permanently change that landscape, settlement pattern and historic setting.
Promises of land or floorspace are not the same as funded, staffed services. The application should show who will provide each facility, when it will open and what happens if it is late.
People need realistic routes to Great Dunmow, railway stations and employment centres at the times they travel. If useful buses are not available from the site, more households will have little practical choice but to drive.
The fields, hedgerows and River Chelmer corridor form a connected landscape. Protected and declining species, lighting, habitat loss and the reliability of long-term mitigation all require proper examination.
Official May figures for Dunmow and Felsted show the combined violence-and-sexual-offences category at 47 in 2026, up from 37 in 2025 (+27%), while all recorded crime was 102, up from 90 (+13%). Essex Police says the scheme could add about 2,074 residents and has requested £589,664 for extra resources. The council must show that any promised policing will actually be available in Great Dunmow.
Choose one subject you understand
These are questions to consider, not paragraphs to copy into an objection.
Make your own comment count
Separate, personal comments are more useful than identical copied objections. Be calm, specific and honest. Say what you have seen or experienced and connect it to a planning issue.
Uttlesford has confirmed that the official deadline for public comments is Monday 24 August 2026. The campaign is keeping Wednesday 12 August 2026 as an earlier target so residents have time to check that their comments were received.
Tap Register in the top menu, create your account, then return to this application and submit your own comment. The portal may take a while to load, especially on a phone or tablet.
If the portal is slow, leave it open for a moment. If it still fails, use the council’s planning search and enter UTT/26/1635/OP.
Show the council the real conditions
Two or three clear photographs with useful captions are better than a large collection without explanation.
Read the flooding and drainage information page →
“St Edmunds Lane looking north at 8.20am on a weekday. Residents' parked cars leave space for only one ordinary vehicle to pass. This is why the assessment should test the road under normal occupied conditions before routing frequent construction traffic through it.”
Read our submitted evidence
Use the two-page summary for a quick introduction, or open the complete objections library.
The quickest explanation of the proposal and the main reasons for concern.
Open PDF →The master objection, technical evidence, policy reviews and supplementary submissions are available together, with their official portal document numbers where the Council has published them.
Open our objections library →These are working community documents. Sources and uncertainties are identified where possible. Always use the official planning portal for the current application record and any later submissions.
Keeping information and organisations clear
This website is an independent information resource created to help residents understand the application and make their own comments. It does not currently represent a formal residents’ organisation or collect names and email addresses.