Local Plan

Please note: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

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.

Representations on Section 1 - Publication Draft Local Plan - Policy SP8: Tendring/Colchester Borders Garden Community

Representation ID: 7467

OBJECT Maldon District Council (Ms Leonie Alpin)

Summary:

As the planning of the Garden Communities has been delegated down to a Strategic Growth DPD, the strategic areas as shown on the policies maps can be indicative only. It is insufficient to allocate 7,500 homes to these Garden Communities in this plan period, based on an indicative area. To provide more certainty, these areas should be defined more clearly on the Local Plan policies maps. The employment allocation for the Garden Community should be explicitly stated in this policy alongside the housing allocations.

More details about Rep ID: 7467

Representation ID: 7223

OBJECT Mr Anthony Barker

Summary:

The outline indication of the published draft strategic land allocations shows the building of an extension to the existing Knowledge Gateway, connected by existing traffic lights to Clingoe Hill and the existing Gateway.
This serious blow to the Salary Brook Valley must be averted by placing all new building (Gateway extension, 'Garden Village' or other) beyond the tree belt which forms the skyline of the Valley in this direction (and which must not itself be reduced or damaged).

More details about Rep ID: 7223

Representation ID: 7220

OBJECT Mr Bob Russell

Summary:

Officer Interpretation - Objection to Local Plan on the basis that the plan is unsound and consideration of the points within the main representation should be shown as amendments to the Local Plan text for SP8.

There should be commitment in the Colchester Local Plan that there shall be no development in Salary Brook Valley, between Bromley Road and Clinghoe Hill, which is visible when viewed from Greenstead and Longridge - and that any new development to the east of urban Colchester shall be built beyond the brow of the hill. Valley and slopes should be public open space.

More details about Rep ID: 7220

Representation ID: 7215

OBJECT Jane Bedford

Summary:

Our Objection to the proposed garden communities are because of :-
Inadequate infrastructure - including pressure on water supplies, waste disposal, medical facilities and emergency services, roads and transport.
Loss of Greenfield sites - particularly agricultural land
Need to utilise existing Brownfield / non greenfield sites for smaller developments prioritising affordable housing.

More details about Rep ID: 7215

Representation ID: 7207

OBJECT Mrs Joanne Bolderson

Summary:

WE ARE STRONGLY AGAINST ANY OF THE LOCAL PLANNING FOR EXTRA HOUSING. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, NO MORE BUILDING

More details about Rep ID: 7207

Representation ID: 7204

OBJECT Kate Mountford

Summary:

Environmentally bad. Far too close to the nature reserve. The reserve in itself does not support the wide range of species alone, it is the surrounding green area of fields and woods that support the wildlife. If it is to be built it must be buffered by 1-2 km's from the nature reserve and the green area left as nature for all people to enjoy.
Colchester can not sustain more expansion. The hospital is at breaking point, schools full and roads horribly congested. Develop the depressed towns in the region not Colchester.

More details about Rep ID: 7204

Representation ID: 7163

OBJECT Gladman Development (Mr Mathieu Evans)

Summary:

Gladman consider that the garden community on the boundary of Colchester and Tendring will not deliver units as quickly as the council expect and therefore further smaller scale housing sites will be required to be allocated to deliver in the short term. Site specific information on the delivery of all of the garden communities is included in appendix 3 of this representation.

More details about Rep ID: 7163

Representation ID: 7145

SUPPORT Sport England (Mrs Maggie Taylor)

Summary:

Principle 15 is welcomed as it provides the policy basis for ensuring that provision is made for green infrastructure (including outdoor sports facilities), to provides opportunities for new residents to be active. This is a key part of the infrastructure of the development. Principle 16 is also welcomed as it makes provision for the provision of indoor leisure and sports facilities within the new community or off-site.
The outdoor and indoor sports facilities strategies prepared or under development as part of the Local Plan evidence base should be used for inform how the development makes provision for indoor/outdoor sport.

More details about Rep ID: 7145

Representation ID: 7110

OBJECT Colchester Natural History Society (Mr Peter Hewitt)

Summary:

This policy on the proposed east garden community should have embedded within it recognition of the vital biodiversity value of the Salary Brook area and to record the firm proposals to afford the site a protective buffer zone in the form of a new country park or preferably an extended Local Nature Reserve. There is no reference to this which is a serious omission and should be rectified prior to this LP being offered for independent examination. See also CNHS Ref. 1 above.

More details about Rep ID: 7110

Representation ID: 7109

SUPPORT Colchester Natural History Society (Mr Peter Hewitt)

Summary:

CNHS welcomes the statement "Safeguarding the important green edge to Colchester will be essential with a new country park along the Salary Brook corridor and incorporating Churn Wood" and would wish this to be strengthened to reference the vital biodiversity of the area. It would be preferable that the country park area be a designated Local Nature Reserve.

More details about Rep ID: 7109

Representation ID: 7100

OBJECT House Builders Federation (Mr. Mark Behrendt)

Summary:

In SP7 the target of 30% is clearly set out in part v. However, in Policy SP8 and Policy SP9 these targets are set out is minimums.
An essential part of the local plan is to provide certainty to the applicants and to decision makers with regard to new development. Placing a minimum on the affordable housing requirement suggests that a higher proportion may be applicable and is purely a starting point for negotiation. To make these policies sound the affordable housing requirement in SP8, SP9 and SP10 should not be set as minimums.

More details about Rep ID: 7100

Representation ID: 7093

OBJECT Education and Skills Funding Agency (Douglas McNab)

Summary:

Policies SP 8, 9 and 10 relate to each of the three proposed Garden Communities. Each policy requires at least one secondary school, primary schools (number and size unspecified) and early-years facilities to be provided to serve new development. The Integrated Delivery Plans for each district provide further details of the number and size of primary and secondary schools required. These details should be included in the above mentioned policies to further demonstrate that the plan has been 'positively prepared' based on a strategy which seeks to meet objectively assessed infrastructure requirements.

More details about Rep ID: 7093

Representation ID: 7083

OBJECT Mr & Mrs A Morgan

Summary:

Predicted growth figures not justified nor sustainable. Colchester has grown so much in recent years and housing figures to provide for local people rather than a huge increase from outside is sufficient.
The predicted rate of growth is just not viable due to already congested roads and over loaded hospital. This is regardless of sustainable transport initiatives (and more is needed now for the present population) and promises of schools, doctors' surgeries, etc.

More details about Rep ID: 7083

Representation ID: 7081

SUPPORT Colchester Borough Councillor (Councillor Tina Bourne)

Summary:

To enable the existing communities and the new garden settlement to
co-exist there are minimum requirements to adhere to , a 1.5 km buffer
between Greenstead/ Longridge and the new settlement. A country park must be
developed to protect the salary brook valley. Housing must be beyond the
tree line at the top of the hill to the East of Greenstead/Longridge. No
building South of A133. Rapid transport link needed to include cycle lanes.
A link road needs to connect A120 and A133. Jobs, schools, healthcare must
be provided. Development must have green around it and through it.

More details about Rep ID: 7081

Representation ID: 7080

SUPPORT Cllr Tim Young

Summary:

To enable the existing communities and the new garden settlement to
co-exist there are minimum requirements to adhere to , a 1.5 km buffer
between Greenstead/ Longridge and the new settlement. A Country park must be
developed to protect the salary brook valley. Housing must be beyond the
tree line at the top of the hill to the East of Greenstead/Longridge. No
building South of A133. Rapid transport link needed to include cycle lanes.
A link road needs to connect A120 and A133. Jobs, schools, healthcare must
be provided. Development must have green around it and through it.

More details about Rep ID: 7080

Representation ID: 7013

OBJECT Colchester Bus Users Support Group (Peter Kay)

Summary:

CBC's continued talking of P&R as a solution to Colchester traffic congestion problems is wholly reality-phobic, and there is no soundness in any reference to further P&R schemes in the new Local Plan.

More details about Rep ID: 7013

Representation ID: 6945

OBJECT Historic England -East of England (Ms N Gates)

Summary:

Officer summary -No indication as to how the extent of the garden communities will be determined. Concerned that the new settlements will be housing led rather than considering the landscape and heritage assets and delivering development that has regard to these assets and which would not allow development in certain constrained areas. Development plan documents should be required, through inclusion of an additional criterion in Policy SP8, to undertake a Heritage Impact Assessment. See SP7 comments

More details about Rep ID: 6945

Representation ID: 6943

OBJECT Mr Nigel Mountford

Summary:

Environmentally and ecologically too destructive. Garden communities must work with the environment. Salary Brook nature reserve is one small part of the diverse environment. The surrounding meadows, woodland and green space support a highly diverse ecosystem. Building on the hillside will destroy this. Environmental protection requires more than protection of the nature reserve.
Proposals are Colchester overspill/spread. The infrastructure and hospital etc in Colchester are at saturation point. Development should be focussed on the regional peripheries not the core. Harwich/Clacton need major investment not Colchester where house prices are far higher.

More details about Rep ID: 6943

Representation ID: 6934

OBJECT Mr Terry Parker represented by Fowler Architecture & Planning Ltd (Mr Callan Powers)

Summary:

The concept of the garden community is supported as a means to deliver sustainable growth in the area. The broad location is not consistent with that set out in TDCs version of the garden communities area of search. The representor's site should be included within this broad area. The Table identifies only 1,250 homes to 2033 which is fewer than stated in SP8, this should be clarified. The policies map should be clarified as to whether this relates to the plan period of potential beyond and it should be ensured that there is consistency with TDC.

More details about Rep ID: 6934

Representation ID: 6909

OBJECT Persimmon Homes (Mr. Matt Parsons)

Summary:

Officer Summary - Persimmon support the creation of the Tendring Colchester Borders Garden Community. Affordable housing target of 30% shouldn't be referred to as a minimum. Uncapped target does not provide certainty. Persimmon site at St. Johns is deliverable, available and suitable and should be identified as either part of the Garden Community or a separate site in its own right.

More details about Rep ID: 6909

Representation ID: 6892

OBJECT Natural England (Kayleigh Cheese)

Summary:

Officer summary -Acknowledge aspiration of a country park and the green infrastructure network. Expect detailed design of Garden Community to avoid indirect impacts to nearby (SSSIs) and Special Protection Area (SPAs). At paragraph 8.4, loss of off-site habitat is acknowledged. The requirements for bird survey and assessment, phasing of development and provision of suitable migratory habitats should be translated into policy.Status and timing of proposal for Strategic Growth DPD isn't clear, may not be sound with regards to NPPF given NE concerns on the strength of Policy SP6 with regards to the protection and enhancement of the natural environment.

More details about Rep ID: 6892

Representation ID: 6827

OBJECT Mr Matthew Rose

Summary:

Severe risk of flooding will be increased to the residents of Longridge along the salary brook.
Infrastructure won't cope with a large number of new homes and the roads of Colchester are awful as it is. This impacts on pollution and commuting time into to the town for work.
The schools, doctors and hospital cannot cope with such a large number of new residents and more should be done to ensure unused property is utilised to house people.
There is a lot of wildlife in the proposed area and species such as dormice would be at great risk.

More details about Rep ID: 6827

Representation ID: 6747

OBJECT Mr Mike Lambert

Summary:

Premature pending evidence the Plan is viable and deliverable

More details about Rep ID: 6747

Representation ID: 6727

OBJECT Mr John Coble

Summary:

Boundaries between developments.

More details about Rep ID: 6727

Representation ID: 6726

OBJECT mrs karen coble

Summary:

Infrastructure issues.

More details about Rep ID: 6726

Representation ID: 6716

OBJECT Mrs Heather Rose

Summary:

Colchester's infrastructure cannot cope with the number of houses it currently has. Schools, doctors and the hospital are at breaking point.
Flood risks are a massive issue to the residents of Longridge and the garden community would increase this risk if situated too close.
There are many protected species living within the salary brook trail and a massive development would impact negatively upon the wildlife and the wellbeing of the existing residents.

More details about Rep ID: 6716

Representation ID: 6711

OBJECT Mr Ian Shepherd

Summary:

The plan must make provisions for a 1.5km buffer zone between any new development and existing developments.
The local landscape/wildlife/biodiversity must be treated with the utmost respect and must receive minimal disruption/displacement, if any at all.
Extra infrastructure must be put in place to cope with the greater strain on resources/services associated with this proposed development.
As the area is in a valley, there is severe risk of flooding. this must be addressed if the proposed development is to go ahead.
Affordable housing must be a significant proportion of any new development.

More details about Rep ID: 6711

Representation ID: 6620

OBJECT Mr Joseph Turner

Summary:

All development should be completely out of sight of Longridge and Greenstead resident ie well over the brow of the hill. A green buffer of at least 1.5 km from salary brook and any new development, as supported by Greenstead ward councillors.

More details about Rep ID: 6620

Representation ID: 6617

SUPPORT Mr Martyn Jordan

Summary:

1. A buffer zone of at least 1.5km needs to be maintained between the East edge of Colchester and the new garden community.
2. Establish a country park between the two areas
3. Infrastructure e.g. Roads needs to be in place before building starts
4. Noise sheilding of new roads needs to be provided
5. Provision for electric car charging points needs to be provided
6. Quality of housing built needs to be comparable with the best in the Colchester area.

More details about Rep ID: 6617

Representation ID: 6602

SUPPORT Manda O'Connell

Summary:

I support the provision of a green buffer between Colchester East and the proposed new garden community of 1km-1.5km in width and in length from A133 to Bromley Road, and incorporating this area in a country park up to and over the brow of the hill on the opposite side of the Salary Brook valley from Colchester East, and supporting paragraphs 15, 19 and 20 with detailed, sound and robust reasons provided above. This is proposed to meet the needs of the residents and settlements in the new Garden Community, Colchester East, Elmstead Market and Wivenhoe.

More details about Rep ID: 6602

Representation ID: 6593

OBJECT Mersea Homes represented by Mr Brian Morgan

Summary:

Retaining a green edge to Colchester and placing the proposed country park in the Salary Brook valley are detailed master planning proposals made without proper evaluation of alternative approaches which should correctly be done at the master planning stage in a future development plan document.

More details about Rep ID: 6593

Representation ID: 6551

SUPPORT Campaign to Protect Rural Essex (Mr Michael Hand)

Summary:

East Colchester benefits from and supports the growth of the University, the Knowledge Gateway (one of Colchester's three Strategic Economic Areas), and the town centre. There are, therefore, realistic prospects of local employment for residents of a new community.

Infrastructure improvements ahead of development will also be required, but not on the same scale as the West Tey GC proposal.

Development of an urban extension to the built up area is less harmful in countryside terms, provided that the Salary Brook valley (including adjoining woodland), is safeguarded.

The principle of development in this location is considered justified and effective.

More details about Rep ID: 6551

Representation ID: 6491

OBJECT Mrs Wendy Fryer

Summary:

We have concerns over traffic in the pretty country lanes that are already used as cut through routes for drivers. We consider the area around Crockleford Heath to be a real beauty spot and are concerned it will be lost to a housing estate, perhaps it does not need to be crammed altogether and we can leave space for the gardens and space to walk in and enjoy.

More details about Rep ID: 6491

Representation ID: 6435

OBJECT CPREssex (David Green)

Summary:

CPRE Colchester group recognises that if the necessary infrastructure and delivery mechanism can be secured, then major development in this location would be acceptable, especially given the proximity of the University and its Knowledge Gateway and therefore the likelihood of local employment.

It is essential that in any development the Salary Brook valley and adjacent woodland is safeguarded.

More details about Rep ID: 6435

Representation ID: 6433

OBJECT RSPB (Mr Mark Nowers)

Summary:

Point 20 in this policy only commits to protect and/or enhance biodiversity. This is contrary to Policy SP7 above and is not consistent with national policy (paragraph 156).

More details about Rep ID: 6433

Representation ID: 6395

OBJECT Mr Chris Orme

Summary:

Too much development adjacent to overcrowded development without adequate preservation of existing green belt land.

More details about Rep ID: 6395

Representation ID: 6364

OBJECT Mr Sean Pordham

Summary:

Sean Pordham

More details about Rep ID: 6364

Representation ID: 6356

SUPPORT Cllr Julie Young

Summary:

To enable the existing communities and the new garden settlement to co-exist there are minimum requirements to adhere to , a 1.5 km buffer between Greenstead/ Longridge and the new settlement. A Countrypark must be developed to protect the salary brook valley. Housing must be beyond the tree line at the top of the hill to the East of Greenstead/Longridge. No building South of A133. Rapid transport link needed to include cycle lanes. A link rd needs to connect A120 and A133. Jobs, schools, healthcare must be provided. Development must have Green around it and through it.

More details about Rep ID: 6356

Representation ID: 6354

OBJECT Mr Chris Hill

Summary:

No provision for the location and size of Salary Brook Country Park. Therefore insufficient protection of endangered species and distinctive sense of place in the area.

Insufficient provision for new infrastructure to be implemented before development commences, risking increasing existing pressure on already overstretched local facilities.

Does not mention existing flooding issues in the area, or include specific mitigations to prevent exacerbating the problem in the existing Flood Zone 3 area. According to the council's own study 'surface water networks are at capacity... surface water cannot be discharged to the existing disposal network'.

More details about Rep ID: 6354

Representation ID: 6346

OBJECT Wivenhoe Society (Professor Jane Black)

Summary:

The proposal is unsound because: (i) it uses agricultural land rated excellent; (ii) It has potential to impact on European designated sites; (iii) it is effectively an extension to Colchester so any affordable housing will not be well located for Tendring residents nor will it help foster economic growth in Tendring; (iv) no feasible solutions for a rapid transit system or possible congestion mitigation measures have been put forward.

More details about Rep ID: 6346

Representation ID: 6308

OBJECT Clive Salmon

Summary:

Any new development to the East of Colchester in the Tendring/Colchester Borders should be over the brow of the hill and out-of-sight of existing residents of Greenstead and Longridge Park. Ideally, there should be a 2km green, undeveloped buffer between current housing and any new development. This idea is supported by the Greenstead Ward councillors.

More details about Rep ID: 6308

Representation ID: 6301

OBJECT Anglian Water Services (Stewart Patience) represented by Anglian Water Services (Stewart Patience)

Summary:

Reference is made to an upgrade to Colchester waste water treatment plant and off-site improvements to the foul sewerage network which is welcomed.

It would be helpful to refer to the phasing of improvements to align the scale and timing of the proposed garden community given that development is expected to come forward after 2033.

More details about Rep ID: 6301

Representation ID: 6280

OBJECT Wivenhoe Town Council (Ms Hazel Humphreys)

Summary:

The policy of 'rapid transit' as a prime means of reducing the impact of the East garden settlement is unsound, as it is already clear that nothing resembling rapid transit is achievable either physically / affordably.

The policy of P&R in the east is unsound because it is based on a wholly reality-phobic view of what P&R can achieve in Colchester generally.

More details about Rep ID: 6280

Representation ID: 6268

OBJECT Colchester East Action Group (Mr Peter Marchant)

Summary:

Any new road in the area should incorporate noise shielding to prevent disturbance to residents from traffic noise

More details about Rep ID: 6268

Representation ID: 6267

OBJECT Colchester East Action Group (Mr Peter Marchant)

Summary:

All new development should be over the brow of the hill and out-of-sight of existing residents.
Housing design should be excellent.
References to historical Colchester.

More details about Rep ID: 6267

Representation ID: 6212

SUPPORT North East Essex Clinical Commissioning Group (Jane Mower)

Summary:

SP8: Tendring/Colchester Borders Garden Community, point E item 13. should be amended to read 'Primary healthcare facilities as appropriate'.

3.12 Policy SP9: Colchester/Braintree Borders Garden Community, point E item 14 should be amended to read 'Primary healthcare facilities as appropriate'.

3.13 Policy SP10: West of Braintree Garden Community, point E item 13 should read 'Primary healthcare facilities as appropriate'.

More details about Rep ID: 6212

Representation ID: 6164

SUPPORT The University of Essex represented by The JTS Partnership LLP (MR Nick Davey)

Summary:

The University of Essex notes, and welcomes, the policy and supports the need to integrate the new Garden Community with its own activities and development proposals for the Campus and the Knowledge Gateway.

The University is, however, disappointed that there is no explicit acknowledgement of the need to provide a good quality, preferably dual carriageway, link, from the A120 to the A133, as an early part of the development.

More details about Rep ID: 6164

Representation ID: 6108

OBJECT Mr Richard Waylen

Summary:

Guarantees of infrastructure to be provided before housing is built

More details about Rep ID: 6108

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult

Related Articles