The councils outlined Mark Wright and Michelle Keegan’s plans to turn the dream Essex castle into a ‘castle’.

Two local councils have criticized Mark Wright and Michelle Keegan’s plans to turn their dream family into a castle.

The couple demolished a $ 1.3 million farm house and built a five-bedroom house in Essex, with a bar, gym and two-door swimming pool.

They recently launched a new planning application to make the surroundings of the estate more secure with a ‘rendered wall’ between 1.8 m and 2.1 m high.

EXCLUSIVE: Two local councils have criticized Mark Wright and Michelle Keegan’s plans to turn their dream family into a castle.

Epping Forest District Council and Stanford Rivers Parish Council claim that the ‘inappropriate’ plans are not in line with the tone of the ‘rural area’ and that trees need to be cut down to make way for the wall.

On one side of the property, there is a public right to block according to the objection.

The Epping Forest District Council wrote: ‘This site is in a very rural area, on a small country road.

While we acknowledge that the existing conifer screen is incompatible with this arrangement, replacing it with a 2.1 m high rendered wall cannot be fully preserved and will fail to improve the rural landscape setting.

Massive work: The couple demolishes a $ 1.3 million farm house and builds a five-bedroom house in Essex, with a bar, gym and two-door swimming pool.

Massive work: The couple demolishes a $ 1.3 million farm house and builds a five-bedroom house in Essex, with a bar, gym and two-door swimming pool.

Plan: They recently launched a new planning application to make the surroundings of the estate more secure with a 'rendered wall' between 1.8m and 2.1m.

Plan: They recently launched a new planning application to make the surroundings of the estate more secure with a ‘rendered wall’ between 1.8m and 2.1m.

Not kept: Councils claim plans are not in tune with 'rural area' and trees need to be cut to make way for wall

Common Right: On one side of the property, there is a right to a common right, which is prevented by objections

Not kept: Councils claim plans are not in tune with ‘rural area’ and trees need to be cut to make way for wall

Rural Settings: Epping Forest District Council wrote: 'This site is in a very rural area, on a small country road.

Rural Settings: Epping Forest District Council wrote: ‘This site is in a very rural area, on a small country road.

Incompatibility: Read the report 'When we acknowledge that the current conifer screen is incompatible with this setting'

Unprotected: 'Replacing it with a 2.1 m high rendered wall cannot be fully preserved and fails to improve the rural landscape setting'

Incompatibility: Read the report ‘When we acknowledge that the current conifer screen is incompatible with this setting’

None of the other properties on this route have such inappropriate boundary treatments.

Also, we notice that the wall to the right of the proposed entrance is inside the trees.

Protecting trees and forest land is a forest land protection order, so tree reports had to be submitted to support this proposal… As a result, important tree property may be lost or destroyed.

‘Our records also show a public right, and checking the Definitive Public Rights of Way map on the Essex County Council website confirms that no changes have been made to its route.

‘Building walls as prescribed will prevent access to this right.’

Inappropriate: The report claimed that 'none of the other properties on this route have such inappropriate border treatments'

Notice: 'Also, we notice that the wall to the right of the proposed entrance is inside the trees' it continued

Inappropriate: The report claimed that ‘none of the other properties on this route have such inappropriate border treatments’

Protected: 'Trees and forest land are protected by a forest land protection order, so tree reports had to be submitted to support this proposal ...'

Protected: ‘Trees and forest land are protected by a forest land protection order, so tree reports had to be submitted to support this proposal …’

Damage: The proposed action 'may cause loss or damage to the assets of important trees'.

'Protected:' Our records also show a public right, and checking the Definitive Public Rights of Way map on the Essex County Council website confirms that no changes have been made to its route.

Damage: The proposed action ‘may cause loss or damage to the assets of important trees’.

Objections: The Parish Council unanimously objected to the plans, stating: 'The Parish Council agrees with this request'

Objections: The Parish Council unanimously objected to the plans, stating: ‘The Parish Council agrees with this request’

The parish committee is equally critical of the plans: ‘The Parish Council agrees with this request.

‘The design of the high walls with pillars and doors is against the rural background and will deviate from the rural character of this particular area of ​​the parish.

“In addition, a public footpath currently runs through this property, and although we understand that there are applications that could change it in the future, we are currently unable to support a planning application that effectively blocks a public right.”

Rural arrangement: 'The design of high walls with pillars and doors is not in keeping with the rural context'

Rural arrangement: ‘The design of high walls with pillars and doors is not in keeping with the rural context’

Public road?  'Additionally, a public footpath currently runs through this property'

Public road? ‘Additionally, a public footpath currently runs through this property’

Future changes: 'There may be applications that can change this in the future ...'

Not supported: '... we are currently unable to support a planning application that effectively blocks a public right'

Future changes: ‘There may be applications that can change this in the future, we are currently unable to support a planning application that effectively blocks a public right’

does not matter!  Both councils had no objection to adding a wooden gate with rendered piers

does not matter! Both councils had no objection to adding a wooden gate with rendered piers

Gorgeous designs: Former Tovy star and Corey actress using a roundabout for a Hollywood-style paver driveway with a bunch of their cars

Gorgeous designs: Former Tovy star and Corey actress using a roundabout for a Hollywood-style paver driveway with a set of their cars

Both councils were not opposed to adding a wooden gate with rendered piers.

The former TOWIE star and Corey actress has filed an application for a Hollywood-style power driveway with a roundabout of their cars.

They need by-fold doors to all the windows on the ground floor at the back, so the whole house opens into the pool area, and Mark has a mini-football pitch.

READ  The Rolling Stones broke the UK chart record with 'Goat Head Soup'

Representatives of Mark Wright labeled the claims ‘nonsense’ as they approached MailOnline.

When contacted by MailOnline, Michelle Keegan’s representatives declined to comment.

Stunning views: They want bi-folding doors for all the windows on the ground floor

Stunning views: They want bi-folding doors for all the windows on the ground floor

Plans for a pool: The whole house opens into the pool area, and Mark has his mini-football pitch

Plans for a pool: The whole house opens into the pool area, and Mark has his mini-football pitch

Not true?  Mark Wright's representatives labeled the claims 'absurd'

Not true? Mark Wright’s representatives labeled the claims ‘absurd’

Written By
More from Harding Hansen

Tiwa Savage Groups Up With Sam Smith For the Sultry ‘Temptation’: Hear

Considerably less than just one week absent from unveiling her new album Celia,...
Read More

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *