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 Charles Molle
I endorse the Council's declared policies of rural separation and the preservation of the uniquely rural character of Copford Green. The proposed sites of East Queensberry and Hall Road recommend themselves in the apparent absence of alternatives. However, has the Council considered the substantial brownfield sites currently occupied by small businesses to the south of London Road, including the site where Renzland Forge previously stood?
A number of problems are outlined for the two sites:
Hall Road - access, rural character, risk of future creep, archaeology, water, congestion.
Queensberry Avensue - Busy junction, nuisance, traffic, woodland.
More details about Rep ID: 3042
COMMENT Environment Agency (Mr Martin Barrell)
Welcome the reference to water infrastructure capacity constraints within this section. Copford and Copford Green (and Marks Tey) are all served by Copford WRC which is over capacity by a figure equivalent to roughly
This must not be exacerbated by further connections. Either upgrades need to be undertaken by Anglian Water and a new permit applied for, or sufficient capacity needs to be created by reducing infiltration into the system prior to development commencing.
Fluvial flood risk from Roman River could impact on development. Further detailed flood modelling required to inform the siting of development within the site.
More details about Rep ID: 2980
COMMENT Highways England (Mark Norman)
Development on the scale proposed here is unlikely to have a severe impact on the Strategic Road Network.
More details about Rep ID: 2786
COMMENT Historic England -East of England (Ms N Gates)
SS5: Copford & Copford Green
We welcome the identification of grade II Brewers Cottage, but note that grade II Old Mill House and grade II Shrub House appear to share boundary with the propose allocation at land to the east of Queensbury Road and consideration should be made to their setting. We welcome that design and landscaping in respect of heritage assets appears in the policy in relation to both
More details about Rep ID: 2665
COMMENT Mr. Graham Barney
Whilst this site does have some merit in 'tidying up' the existing development, there are a number of significant issues. However, it may be possible that these can be overcome and given these assurances by CBC, this site may have potential. Whilst the mix of housing is stated as being in line with the existing styles in Queensberry and its surroundings, there is no mention of any affordable housing. It is hoped a play area is included and an appropriate housing density.
More details about Rep ID: 2512
If these problems and possibly others can be overcome with clear assurances regarding the archaeology, footways, water/ drainage, use of agricultural land and suitable facilities, then this site has some merit for consideration. This must be subject to an appropriate housing density and mix including some affordable homes.
More details about Rep ID: 2510
OBJECT Andrew & Joy Waters and 1 other
The objections at the current time are on the following grounds:
1. The decision on the number required is premature and over too long a period
2. The apportionment of new housing to Colchester area is too large
3. Most if not all of a fair projected level of housing for Copford can be accommodated within either the existing envelope or on its brownfield sites
4. The Hall Road site in particular is part of an essential break in the proposed urban sprawl
5.The Hall Road site has access issues and development will be detrimental to local residents
More details about Rep ID: 2476
COMMENT Essex County Council (Matthew Jericho)
Developments totalling 120 dwellings during the Plan period would generate up to 36 primary aged pupils and up to 24 secondary aged pupils. At primary level Copford VC CE Primary School, which serves this area, operating at capacity . This school also has a significant amount of temporary accommodation that will need to be replaced to meet ongoing demand in this area. Cumulative impact of village expansion could result in need for secondary school capacity expansion.
Developer contributions would be required to expand the current facilities to accommodate the growth.
More details about Rep ID: 2339
OBJECT Ms L Jenner
I object to Hall Road because:
- The area is currently a greenfield site, it is agricultural land with BAP habitat margins, hedgerows and bats. The nearby area is used for recreation, this will change the usage.
- This site represents a 26% growth If considering Copford alone, (exc.copford green), one of the highest growth areas in a village.
- I disagree with the development boundary, this is not infill.
- There are no services in the village such as doctors, shops, enough school places. This is not sustainable.
- There are sites that have less environmental impact.
- The access is inadequate and unsafe.
More details about Rep ID: 2039
OBJECT Mr E James
I object to the Hall Road development. This is a considerable increase to the size of Copford village of 25% growth (for both developments).
The area is a greenfield site with good biodiversity in the surroundings and contribution to green infrastructure. The area is used for recreation and currently contributes to CBC wellbeing policy.
In my opinion, this is not infill development and sets an unhealthy precedent.
There are better alternative sites in the area such as brownfield. Hall Road access is inadequate and possibly dangerous.
There are insufficient amenities and services to support these houses .This is not sustainable.
More details about Rep ID: 1995
OBJECT Mr M Stubbins
The Hall Road site is well used by dog walkers, cyclists and workers. Developing this land will completely change the amenity value of the site and use of access to Pits Woods.
There are not enough amenities to support this development such as school places, police services, doctors, not to mention the poor traffic in the area. This should be resolved before developing. In copford alone, this represents the highest growth of any village at 26%.
The site is greenfield and CBC policy is to avoid building on these areas. Bats are protected and have been seen in the area.
More details about Rep ID: 1980
OBJECT Edward Gittins & Associates (Edward Gittins)
Land at London Road, Marks Tey, the Car Boot site, should be allocated for housing.
More details about Rep ID: 1934
OBJECT MR David Knock
The increases in population implied by these proposals (and those in Stanway) will not be matched by improvements in the transport and social infrastructure.
Over the last few years the local roads have not received sufficient maintenance. Patching often lasts just a few months, while the country lanes are seriously deteriorating.
2. The Hall Road site will require earthworks where Hall Road meets London Road. This will ruin what is now a pleasant rural lane.
3. Instead of Hall Lane the brownfield site further down London Road, in the area of what was Renzland's and the old Telephone exchange, should be considered.
More details about Rep ID: 1930
OBJECT Mr Stephen Braund
70 houses on land close to the end of Queensberry Ave. No detail is shown as to the proposed access for this development, so I can only assume that it is intended to provide this either via Queensberry Ave and or the existing developments adjoining London Rd My objection is that access via Queensberry Ave is tota11y unsuitable.I also believe this proposed development to be inappropriate as it reduces still further the open countryside in and around Copford.urging planners to protect Colchester's green lungs against urban sprawl.
More details about Rep ID: 1844
OBJECT Dr J Crummy
Objections to site South of London Road:
Prime agricultural land
Poor and unsustainable use of space
Inadequate and non-upgradable access
More details about Rep ID: 1746
COMMENT Copford with Easthorpe Parish Council (Mr Drury)
Object to SS5 points of concern;
Number of houses / density;
Capacity of infrastructure. Improvements should be in place before any houses built.
Queensbury Ave- policy should seek protection of mature trees/shrubs/hedgerows. Concern about access and pedestrian safety.
Hall Road- Safe pedestrian access question sustainability. Concern about sprawl into countryside especially Pitts Wood. Policy to seek protection of heritage assets including archaeology.. Policy detailing very low density development in keeping with its surroundings also required.
More details about Rep ID: 1677
OBJECT mrs anita stawicki
I object on the following grounds the access road is too narrow only single track the entrance splay onto the main is too small. The surrounding area is a Conservation area of outstanding beauty and we have a ancient wood in Pits Wood. Brown field sites should be explored first not on prime farming land we all need to be self supporting in these uncertain times. Poor planning vision to squeeze in these houses behind existing properties Copford
More details about Rep ID: 1631
COMMENT British Horse Society (Mrs Sue Dobson)
Where public rights of way are affected by development the opportunity to upgrade and enhance the network to include their use by more user groups, including equestrians, should be taken and this commitment should be embedded within this Policy.
More details about Rep ID: 1557
COMMENT Essex Bridleways Association (Susan Dobson)
Policy SS5 Copford Housing sites: we note that diversion of the existing public right of way will be necessary and request that this is upgraded to bridleway status to enable its use by more user groups.
More details about Rep ID: 1497
SUPPORT Ms Susanna Harrison represented by Fenn Wright (Mr Roger Hayward)
Support for propsed housing allocation
More details about Rep ID: 1480
OBJECT Dr Michael Monk
1. Adverse effect on character of neighbourhood (built)
2. Adverse effect on character of neighbourhood (natural)
3. Adverse effect on public amenity
4. Adverse effect on residential amenity of neighbours
5. Adverse effect of visual impact of development
6. Development out of character compared with existing ribbon development in the vicinity.
7. Adverse effect on setting of a Listed Building.
8. Adverse effect on highway safety and the convenience of road users (pedestrians)
9. Unnecessary development within this area of village - further expansion of other sites with better infrastructure.
More details about Rep ID: 1369
OBJECT Mrs Tessa Sagar
CBC is taking the easiest and most damaging options for growth in Copford. Hall Road site is well managed, profitable agricultural land with limited access onto London Rd.
Many alternatives including brownfield sites exist. Copford Place, a grade 2 listed house, has fallen into disrepair, yet could be an excellent example of a restoration and redevelopment area similar to listed buildings on the old garrison.
The under-used Telephone exchange has equal potential for residential development along with adjacent brownfield sites occupying generous areas of currently poorly maintained land. These sites all have good accessibility.
More details about Rep ID: 1283
OBJECT Mr Nigel Sagar
Hall Road is inappropriate.
1. Access is inadequate, being flanked by steeply banked garden land
2. An ancient route, of major local and historical significance
3. Adjacent houses are important to the heritage of the village which would be swamped by the proposal: include Keeper's Cottage, Brewer's Cottage, Old Post Office
4. Likelihood of underlying archaeology which is likely to be a discouragement for developers for the modest site
5. The land is productive and development unnecessary as plentiful brownfield can be considered in the lifetime of the plan
1. Proposal has merit with care over controlled access
More details about Rep ID: 1266
copford. proposed plan renia.pdf
More details about Rep ID: 1204
OBJECT Mr Keith Quinton
Land to the East of Queensberry Avenue.
Please see my previous representation ID 1152.
I have decided to make ID 1152 an objection rather than a comment, because I am unsure about the status of a comment. My previous text all applies to this objection.
I am unhappy about the number of dwellings proposed for the reasons stated in my ID 1152. The total number, if 70 is allowed, will exceed the number permitted by the Essex Design Guide for the type of road.
More details about Rep ID: 1177
COMMENT Mr Keith Quinton
Land to the East of Queensberry Avenue.
I note that there is a problem with water supply and waste water treatment for Copford, and am pleased that you will not allow development to come forward until the issues are resolved.
You state that waste will be directed to Colchester's facilities but it is not stated how the water supply issues can be resolved.
We have noticed that our water pressure is not always what it should be, even without all the proposed new homes.
More details about Rep ID: 1156
Land to the East of Queensberry Avenue.
The existing Public Right of Way. I believe that the electricity supply to our homes at the east end of Queensberry Avenue is laid in the Right of Way from London Road.
So if any diversion is planned for the ROW then the electricity cables, and any other services, would also have to be diverted.
Also there seems to be little point in upgrading the ROW as the existing constraint at the London Road end would still exist.
Regular maintenance would be helpful rather than upgrade.
More details about Rep ID: 1155
Land to the East of Queensberry Avenue.
There is an important ditch running through the development area, which takes surface water run off from London Road and will need to be suitably piped or culverted to ensure that flooding of London Road and the development land doesn't occur.
This ditch has been filled with soil in the past and had to be dug out and reinstated as a ditch because flooding occurred.
The ditch is on the same "line" as the major trees running north/south.
More details about Rep ID: 1154
Land to East of Queensberry Avenue.
We are against the removal of the existing trees in the proposed development area. They provide important habitat for a variety of animals, and we have seen bats, which may well be living there.
More details about Rep ID: 1153
Land to the east of Queensberry Avenue.
The existing road is 5.5m wide and is currently a cul-de-sac with circa 150 homes already. Adding 70, and still leaving it as a cul-de-sac, will take the total to 220, which is in excess of that permitted (200) for a "Feeder Road cul-de-sac" in the Essex Design Guide.
We already have all day parking in Queensberry Ave by people using the station and the congestion has been getting worse over the last few years. So we have great concerns about adding roughly 50% more houses all with access via Queensberry Avenue only.
More details about Rep ID: 1152
OBJECT Ms Linda Gossett
STN Hall Rd High quality agricultural land should not be built on. Will set a precedent. Archaeological exploration should be carried out. There is a Roman Villa one side and remains the other side of Hall Rd. It is a narrow road, not suitable for approx. 100 extra cars if 50 homes built. Very busy Swan Public House exits a short distance away from a traffic island and opposite New Copford Place entrance. The old Copford place site is still in abeyance. Pse consider change of use for undercapacity industrial site further up London road. Infrastructure issues.
More details about Rep ID: 1143
SUPPORT Ms Linda Gossett
Queensberry Ave should have around 40 houses not 70 too high over next 15 years. A12 noise issues. Access will add to traffic on London Road. Copford and Copford Green ONE WHOLE village. Small village already high infill at back of London Road. Traffic and pollution noise problems exist. Site amber rated, water issues need to be addressed. Hedges and Trees left standing/replaced where possible. Schools hospitals infrastructure a problem anywhere in Colchester. CBC should stop building and address these issues first.
More details about Rep ID: 1142
OBJECT Mr Tony Farress
I strongly object to the proposed development to the east of Queensberry Avenue. This road is far from suitable for increased traffic which would result from another 70 dwellings. A number of mature trees would also have to be cut down to open the proposed access point. Even before the two new developments on London road are completed, infrastructure in the area is struggling to cope.
More details about Rep ID: 1076
OBJECT Mrs Elke Singer
I object to the Hall Road site and have reservations about the Queensbury Road site as well.
In both cases there are concerns over access arrangements.
In addition there are the water supply and waste water issues expressed by Anglian Water!
More details about Rep ID: 890
OBJECT Peter O'Donnell represented by Cheffins (Mr Ian Smith)
We object to the Hall Road site and have reservations about the Queensbury Road site,. In both cases there are concerns over access arrangements.
We have suggested an alternative site in Copford Green.
More details about Rep ID: 482
OBJECT Mr & Mrs C Shenfield
Any such development would be out of keeping with what still remains an essentially rural area. Development at Stanway have put pressure on roads and schools. any requirements for housing should only be addressed by smaller, in keeping developments
More details about Rep ID: 203
OBJECT Mr Neil Gilbranch
London Road is already a problem for local traffic due to uncontrolled parking by people travelling onwards by train or van into London. The new road at Stanway and existing new housing sites off London road to the west of Tollgate have also increased traffic significantly with frequent queues onto the Tollgate roundabout which also delays buses. The recently approved retail and future planned development at Tollgate will exacerbate the problem. Please improve local traffic flow and enhance cycle and pedestrian safety for example by carefully planned parking restrictions along London Road and surrounding residential areas.
More details about Rep ID: 11
These propslas althoughof limited scale, appear to make no provison for improved infrastructure. We have a legacy in Colchester Borough of inadequate infrastructure due to piecemeal planning policy.
More details about Rep ID: 9
OBJECT Nina Crummy
A) The land south of London Road/West of Hall Road although it is Grade A agricultural land.
B) Single site access onto London Road from Hall Road is not sensible. It is a narrow lane, part of the Roman River Conservation Area, and entirely unsuitable for frequent 2-way traffic.Turning right onto the London Road takes a long time in moderately heavy traffic; when traffic is diverted along the London Road from the A12 because of accidents, it can be impossible. If this area is to be developed, then access onto London Road further west should be considered.
More details about Rep ID: 7