MM39

None

There are known archaeological remains on Middlewick that are very visible. It’s not just WW2 artefacts but the firing positions, target tracks and butts should also be preserved. In addition, there are probably remains of which we currently know nothing. I draw your attention to the Roman Circle at Circular Road. When this was uncovered it was a very exciting discovery. However, it was only through campaigning that the developers did not build over the top of it. Subsequently, little has been made of this rare and exciting discovery; at least not enough.
How then can we trust that Middlewick will be explored correctly for archaeological artefacts? Will the developers have to pay for such investigation and take all precautions to ensure that valuable treasures are not lost?
Even if the pill-boxes are preserved, they will no longer be seen in context. They will be surrounded by housing that will hide the setting in which they were created. I truly believe that we take these things for granted but eventually we will destroy all our heritage in the pursuit of so-called progress.

The assurance that if any 'heritage assets' are found then this will not involve building a visitor centre over more valuable green land to attract a few visitors a year.

Colchester does not make a lot of it's Roman history, where interesting things have been found, such as the Roman circus, it just seems to be that some chalk lines are drawn on the floor, and then it is build on anyway, so I cannot see that this is justification for digging this area up. It is far out of town and even areas of historic interest in the town centre are not marked up, so I doubt that this will be a valuable asset to the area for visitors, it would need to be special for them to travel.

More investigation into the social benefits of the Wick to some of the poorer parts of Colchester, as well as celebration of their history.

The archeological report ignores the historical social use of the Wick, which can be seen as old footpaths (some without numbers) crossing to lost places like Old Heath Port. Eg from Cherry Tree, Cabbage Hall Lane, across the Wick to Wick Rd of Speedwell, down a track to the Colne.
The Wick is also unusual in that it is surrounded by council estates. Residents from Speedwell Estate, built between the wars, and 1950's Monkwick can remember their families using the Wick from nearly 100 years ago, for short cuts when walking to work, collecting firewood, picking berries, playing etc.

Don't build on the Wick

This is a site of historic interest. There was a horse race track on there once, many years ago, and it's documented in the newspaper that there was an accident when the roof blew off and carried some roofers with it.

No houses should be built

Why would management be required for the redoubt.
No trees should be touched there are many ancient trees which can't be touched.
We should be adding to the canopy.

Landscaping opportunity ? Can't people just see these things when they're walking ?

This just sounds like so much twaddle by the council to try and justify building 1000 more ( unnecessary ) houses. They do little to promote the town's history, keen as they are to build over most of it.

The Middlewick Ranges should not be kept in the local plan.

MM35 – I object to this development. This is identified as an are for opportunity – for who? What is the evidence of opportunity for local residents, road users, as I cannot see any in the document? How can the ‘benefits’ of the development outweigh the features of the sight? This is surely impossible as the biodiversity of the area can NEVER be off-set by environmental mitigation – once the land is lost to concrete the nature will never return. The acid grasslands cannot be replicated anywhere else or destruction mitigated for, the same with the ancient woodlands.

MM36 - The increased number of vehicles will have a major impact on a local road system which is already struggling to cope with all the housing development in Colchester over the last 10 years. This also increases air pollution affecting plants, animals and humans. Since the new development at Rowhedge Wharf – the increase in CO2 from extra vehicles along Fingringhoe Rd has started damaging plants in people’s front gardens. Existing grasslands, trees and soil on the site absorb CO2 so where will this all go once under concrete? How can it be scored positive for reducing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions?

MM37 – Acid grassland is a nationally important habitat and the inspector appears to have ignored reports by Essex Wildlife, Colchester Nat[1]ural History and the Butterfly Conservation Group about this. Lockdown restrictions resulted in residents, like myself, having time to ‘get to know’ The Wick and discover its natural beauty and biodiversity. It has helped myself and others to promote their well-being – see Save the Ranges and Friends of Middlewick Facebook groups. Evidence of biodiversity spotted – green woodpecker, buzzard, blue, great and long tailed tits, Fieldfare, skylark.

MM38 – The ‘green lung’ of south Colchester will be lost and not able to absorb CO2 from Mersea and Abbot’s Rds. Area acts as buffer between Monkwick and Old Heath developments reducing pollution, promoting emotional well-being of residents who use it/houses look out on to Wick. If developed will create a large urban sprawl. I cannot see any benefit to local residents as will increase traffic, CO2, pressure on amenities and reduced well-being. Risk of increased flooding as no earth to soak up water.
MM39 – The CBC Green Infrastructure Strategy 2011 is out-of-date, being ten years old. It refers to the Middlewick Ranges as a farmland plateau, not acid grassland – surely the strategy should be reviewed in this light? Electric pylons – where will these go, if re-sited will affect landscape. Residents whose gardens back onto/look out on Wick will have their view spoiled – decreasing emotional well-being.
MM45 – how will the development improve biodiversity, as it won’t be able to maintain it? If an area is covered in concrete the wildlife don’t just pick and up and move somewhere else – the obvious result will be less, it does not replenish itself and just regenerate - it does not return. Loss of habitat will negatively impact natural surrounding areas not ‘physically touched’ by development as there will be less food, cover for wildlife in these areas. Why, in the original consideration of Middlewick, were the Local Wildlife Status, lowland acid grassland & protected species not referred to as reason for rejection?
MM46 - The local plan is unsounds because it has not been recognised that this site is acid grassland. The DEFRA calculation does not allow for irreplaceable habitat – anything destroy will be irreplaceable. If acid grasslands are created from scratch they cannot completely mitigate damage already caused by acid grassland destroyed. It is not like for like, this is nature, not knocking down and re-building an old wall.
MM47 - The process by which the site was assessed and identified as suitable does not meet the four soundness tests as set out in paragraph 182 of the NPPF. In that the Local Plan is not:  consistent with national policy  based on proportionate evidence  effective  positively prepared. Much of the wildlife/plants on the Wick’s acid grasslands are protected under Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. It is one of the last significant remaining pieces of undisturbed lowland dry acid grassland/heath, formerly widespread across the region.