Please note: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.
If you haven't got an account you can register now.
If you have forgotten your password you can request a new password.
You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.
OBJECT Mr T Smith
development on this scale
will be detrimental to the character of this area, greatly increasing traffic and disturbing wildlife.
The exit road for the development next to the A12 would similarly join a dangerous stretch of Bergholt Road , and the constant noise of the A12 would be very unpleasant.
Furthermore, we have to consider the appreciable disturbance and noise that inevitably accompanies any building site.
All in all I do not consider development on this scale is appropriate for this part of Colchester and would emphasise the necessity to protect our precious countryside.
More details about Rep ID: 2409
COMMENT Essex County Council (Matthew Jericho)
Reference should be made in paragraph 6.34 to 'safe access' to ensure consistency with paragraph 6.36. The area shows significant surface water flood risk to the east of St Botolph's Brook.
Additional bullet point needs to be added to ensure consistency with para 6.34 - noting access to be directly off the B1508.
More details about Rep ID: 2304
OBJECT Braiswick Residents Association (Mr Robert Waites)
The draft Local Plan wishes to avoid development on land to the south of the West Bergholt to avoid 'inter-visibility' between Colchester and West Bergholt (policy 6.210). However will not the proposed development of St Botolph's Farm have a similar effect (Policy NC3)?
More details about Rep ID: 2215
OBJECT Mr Thomas Stevenson
The Local Plan clearly states (6.210) that development south of West Bergholt towards Colchester would not be suitable because it would lead to 'visual coalescence'.
Whilst it is reassuring that Colchester are applying this principle within West Bergholt, it is obvious that any development on sites north of Braiswick, such as this, would also contribute to this visual coalescence. For this reason, the borough council should reconsider proposals to allocate for development the land south of the A12 which directly contributes to this visual break.
More details about Rep ID: 2088
OBJECT Mr Fraser McLaren
The adding of 50 houses will cause even further congestion on the B1058 and add to the bottle neck by North Station. The entry / exit site is on to (or just after)a 60 mile an hour section which is likely to result in accidents.
This development would add to the noise and environmental pollution within Braiswick.
More details about Rep ID: 1968
Objection to the St Botolph's Farm site on the grounds of poor environmental features and adding to the coalescence of West Bergholt and Braiswick
More details about Rep ID: 1849
OBJECT Mr David Mehigan
See attachment in NC3. Previous applications for building in this area have been rejected due to the unacceptable noise levels and development would be close to the flood zone. Residents in the Braiswick area are close to the A12 and as the road gets busier the noise levels are increasing to an unacceptable level. The local plan should state that any development here would need to take these concerns into consideration. Furthermore, consultation should continue with the committee of the neighbourhood plan to ensure the development meets needs of local residences.
More details about Rep ID: 1387
OBJECT Mrs Beverley Parker
1. Any further development within this part of Colchester will result in further pressure to the local road network particularly at North Station.
2. The traffic congestion generated by the Chesterwell development of 1600 new homes is not yet known, an additional 88 homes on the B1508 is not going to help the situation
3. The proposed access point onto the B1508 is within the 60 miles per hour zone and would cause significant highway safety issues
4. The existing local schools and health care facilities are already struggling to cope with the recent expansion of the area
More details about Rep ID: 1374
OBJECT Miss Charlotte Parker
The proposed site north of achnacone has a well used beautiful foot path running through it, the majority of this foot path is already being engulfed by the new chesterwell development at Mile End. We should be protecting these pockets of land not developing. Soon all of our footpaths will be through housing estates, do we really need these extra houses in this area?
More details about Rep ID: 1278
OBJECT Mrs Shelley Persent
Local area is predominantly low density and the Bergholt Road and North Station Roundabout cannot cope with the volume of traffic at present without adding up to another 50 dwellings.
More details about Rep ID: 1103
OBJECT Mrs Karhleen Jacobs
Building on these three sittes would mean even more traffic on B1058 adding to the bottle neck at North Station. Area does not have infrastructure to support more homes. There are no shops or public leisure facilities,,very little public open space. Nearest doctors a mile away already very busy.Very limited public transport. Inclusion of these three new sites surely contrary to Neighbourhood Plan for Myland and Braiswick
More details about Rep ID: 1057
OBJECT Mr Phil Coleman
St Botophs Farm-A proposal for up to 50 houses near 85 Braiswick has been proposed. This would add further congestion to the local area particularly as further vehicles would hit the already congested Bakers Lane and Bergholt Road/North station areas. Again this area is part of the NAGUE which is delivering 1600 properties so more should be stopped.
Why would this be required to further densley populate the area?
More details about Rep ID: 1023
OBJECT Mr Michael Tymkow
Any development of this site would have a detrimental affect on the well known and documented issues of traffic congestion, noise and environmental pollution within Braiswick. These issues are already identified in the Neighbourhood Plan which states " .. that to ensure that Myland and Braiswick do not end in perpetual gridlock, there needs to be an overall reduction in car use ...". In particular, the Bergholt Road and the North Station 'pinch point' will be badly affected.
More details about Rep ID: 766
OBJECT MR SHAUNE WORRALL
1. The nature and position of the site and evidence of subsidence make this site inappropriate for the proposed large scale development.
2. 50 properties is overdevelopment.
3. Likelihood of serious accidents accessing the Bergholt road from the site.
4. Removal of important animal and tree species from the site.
5. Loss of amenity by way of loss of privacy to neighbouring properties.
6. Light pollution in a natural night-time area.
More details about Rep ID: 667
OBJECT Mr Nicholas Gerrard
See comments on North Colchester NC3
More details about Rep ID: 312