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 mrs karen Leathedale
i have lived on Lakeland for over ten years . and i object to this very strongly. this is open space and you should have planted trees on there .you have been underhanded and not open about things . parking will be a nightmare most houses have two cars find some back bone and do the right thing please
More details about Rep ID: 2112
OBJECT Ms Megan Wood
We live directly opposed this piece of land which we believed to be public open space and would not be changed to residential use. It should not be built on and we fail to even understand that there be enough room for a development there. It would change the entrance to the whole estate and would not be welcome. Trees please!
More details about Rep ID: 2061
OBJECT Mr Oliver Anthony
This area is clearly unsuitable for housing, it would not accommodate 28 caravans, let alone homes with amenities! Not to mention the fact that current residents would be massively overlooked and have no outdoor space to enjoy.
There is plenty of land in the area which these properties can be built, why build them on top of current dwellings?
The other main issue here is this land has been reclassified without public consultation along with a host of admin errors and 'oversights' from the council. The application is currently being reviewed by the secretary of state.
More details about Rep ID: 1990
OBJECT Miss Sue Richardson
The new dwellings proposed are not in keeping with the surrounding area and will dwarf those closest to them.
More details about Rep ID: 1818
OBJECT mark rusted
This part of SR6 was always shown as two houses to match the phase one houses. Secondly this application is regarding provision for one car per household (plots 13-28) is not anywhere close to being sufficient. This is evident throughout the rest of this new development where people are now parking on the pavement or in other streets due to the lack of consideration in the planning stage around parking. Taking away more landscaped green space to add extra parking I'd not acceptable either. My final objection is to do with the loss of open space. It will feel claustrophobic.
More details about Rep ID: 1813
OBJECT Mr Steve King
Amongst an alarming number of issues it's clear that CBC were not transparent with SPC or residents regarding their intentions on this parcel of land, in fact they appeared to purposefully hide the fact that they had overlooked the open space when granting the approval of the masterplan. CBC delayed plans from coming to the surface to avoid challenge, now we find this reserved matters application, already presented to the planning committee for approval on the 6th September is part of the Local Plan 2017 - 2032 Preferred Options. This open space can be retained
as per barrister Clay
More details about Rep ID: 1802
OBJECT Mr Keith Williams
The site is open space, and correct procedures have not been followed to revise this. The government's pepper potting policy has been ignored. The planning application152817 may be called in by the Secretary of State, so revise the local plan under these circumstances would surely be in contempt of the SoS office while it is still a matter for their consideration
More details about Rep ID: 1782
OBJECT Mrs Samantha Kensdale
I object to the proposed planning application on the entrance to Lakelands, Stanway. The proposed dwellings will be overbearing and overdeveloped on the highest piece of land on the lakelands estate. Affordable homes should be integrated amongst the estate.. These buildings will have a detrimental effect on the current surrounding properties resulting in lack of light.. Lack of provision for parking is going to create congestion in the surrounding roads creating a serious hazard for both drivers and pedestrians. Colchester Borough Council should NOT be permitted to change this open space to residential without following the correct procedures.
More details about Rep ID: 1360
OBJECT Mrs Jacqui Griffiths
CBC were not transparent with SPC or residents regarding their intentions on this parcel of land, in fact they appeared to purposefully hide the fact that they had overlooked the open space when granting the approval of the masterplan.
More details about Rep ID: 1304
OBJECT Mrs Katy Adams
CBC were not transparent with SPC or residents regarding their intentions on this parcel of land, in fact they appeared to purposefully hide the fact that they had overlooked the open space when granting the approval of the masterplan. It seems as though CBC delayed plans from coming to the surface to avoid challenge, now we find this reserved matters application, already presented to the planning committee for approval on the 6th September is part of the Local Plan 2017 - 2032 Preferred Options.
This open space can be retained as confirmed by barrister Jonathan Clay - opinion dated 20/08/16
More details about Rep ID: 1183
OBJECT Mr Derek Trevor Ireland
This land should remain as public open space. Creation of proposed dwellings will produce a canyon of properties on the entrance to Church Lane. Developers should not be allowed to dump their obligation for social housing on land that would not be economic for their preferred development.
More details about Rep ID: 1120
OBJECT mr Peter Leathedale
The residents of this estate do not want anything built on the entrance to our estate it is public OPEN SPACE cbc can say what they like they are Not supporting the residents the sooner Flagship withdraw the application the better they may have spent money on moving church lane and the gas main but we don't want anything on our estate entrance
More details about Rep ID: 1094
OBJECT Mr Neil Marking
I think that it is morally corrupt that the council can ignore legally binding agreements for open residential space and then change it without public knowledge. The council is there to represent the people which you are clearly not. If this goes ahead then shame on you all.
More details about Rep ID: 1013
OBJECT Mrs Karrianne Marking
I object in the strongest sense to the landlord being changed to allow residential use. It is public open space. It should not be built on. Where are the trees/shrubs that the council were supposed to plant?
Open space should be safe from concrete, especially when they could build within an existing building site a stones throw away. Why build here? Why take away an established plot of land that is used by numerous ages?
This surely cannot go ahead.
More details about Rep ID: 985
OBJECT Mr Tovey
This open space can be retained as confirmed by barrister Jonathan Clay opinion dated 20/08/16 and the council should retain it in line with policy. They are choosing to let it be developed because it makes the planning departments life easier.
More details about Rep ID: 968
SUPPORT La Ronde Wright Ltd (Mrs Nicole Wright)
We act for Flagship Housing Group Limited who have an interest in the land.
The site benefits from outline consent for residential use and proposals prepared by Flagship Housing Group Limited demonstrate that 28 units could be accommodated on the site. The landowners have confirmed that the site is available and deliverable.
It is in a highly sustainable location within close proximity to local services and amenities. There is a good highway network and established pedestrian and cycle links to encourage access by bus, walking and cycling promoting healthy lifestyles.
The proposed allocation would provide certainty to the landowners.
More details about Rep ID: 721
OBJECT Mr Matt Free
Please refer to 152817 which includes this parcel of land. Residents, SPC, Rt Hon Priti Patel and Cllr Kevin Bentley have all strongly objected to this application. There was no public consultation, as stated in the current DP15 CBC Policy and also contained within paragraph 74 of the NPPF, that can change the designation of land from Public Open Space to residential. Furthermore, this parcel of land should have been fully landscaped in 2006 as per a Discharge of Condition 03 (97/1428) and CBC are in breach of this condition, this has been confirmed by Daniel Cooper 'Planning Enforcement Officer'.
More details about Rep ID: 431