MM47

ABOLISH THIS STUPID IDEA

Thanks for the opportunity to give my concerns and reasons for my objection to this the plans to build a thousand homes on the middlewick Ranges .
As common sense tells us there isn't sufficient infrastructure to support this housing Schools,Doctors, Dentist Hospital. All of which are overloaded and can't cope already on top of that you have the traffic problems and pollution problems which already exist in this area any extra created by this development will cause absolute chaos.
Please think of the future for the young people and us oldies think the carbon footprint save our Town and the planet we need the green space for Nature which is gradually being eroded.
If these homes are built they probably won't be used for local people who are struggling for homes.
Please think our areas and towns future and this should not not be guided by greed for money.
I was bred and born in Colchester and I'm discusted by the way it's being spoilt with no consideration of the future.

Tackle the issue of no local employment in the masterplan.

The Masterplan does not recognise the need for employment. Local work is key to making this area work. The nearby industrial estate at Whitehall and Gosbecks are full and can't be expanded. The old industrial area/port of the Hythe is shrinking and being converted to low cost flats. The town centre has descended into low pay cheap shops and services. Anyone living on Middlewick will have to travel across the centre north or west to find work. At least five miles. That is unsustainable. Alternative methods of transport from this hilly area with rotten road structure are really not an option. Without well paid employment it will end up as a low rent sink estate. Middlewick should be ruled out of the Local Plan because no masterplan will work without the scope to earn a decent wage to support a family.

There is an overlooking of the classifcation of Acid Grassland by both the inspector and CBC, and the importance of this UK Biodiversity Action Plan top priority national scope.
Middlewick is one of the last significant remaining pieces of undisturbed lowland dry acid grassland/heath. This unique environment support several plant, invertebrate and bird species which are protected under
the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and should never, as a local wildlife site, been allowed to remain in the plan.
To identify Middlewick as suitable (para 182 NPPF) is not consistent with national policy, evidence based, effective nor positively prepared.

There is an overlooking of the classifcation of Acid Grassland by both the inspector and CBC, and the importance of this UK Biodiversity Action Plan top priority national scope.
Middlewick is one of the last significant remaining pieces of undisturbed lowland dry acid grassland/heath. This unique environment support several plant, invertebrate and bird species which are protected under
the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and should never, as a local wildlife site, been allowed to remain in the plan.
To identify Middlewick as suitable (para 182 NPPF) is not consistent with national policy, evidence based, effective nor positively prepared.

The plan is in contrast with national policies and does not rely of substantive and proportionate evidence for a positive development in terms of naturalistic conservation, environmental impact, and socio-demographical assessment

- Crucially, several species in the site are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. As such the site should have not been considered for development in the first place.

The site should be protected as a rare acid grassland area.

The Middlewick Ranges are home to badgers, nightingales, skylarks, bats and rare species of bees and butterflies. Their habitat should not be destroyed to create 1,000 homes. It should be protected as an acid grassland site and its loss would be irreplaceable. It should be recognised as an important site of biodiversity and should be a priority for wildlife conservation, not destruction. Colchester Borough Council has exceeded previous dwelling targets by almost 900, hence, 1,000 houses on the Middlewick Ranges site is in no sense a strategic necessity, simply an opportunity to exploit a resource.

The build footprint cannot be included in the Local Plan until it has been adequately assessed.

Modification re part vi) is incorrect. The built footprint has been sited on habitat areas that have not been adequately assessed (See objection ID: 8033); these areas are known to contain and support protected species, and include habitats consistent with UK Priority habitats Lowland grassland and / or Lowland Meadow.

Middlewick should be removed from the plan as the Ecological evidence report has not demonstrated that analogous compensatory habitat for the habitats lost to development can be achieved.

Re part vii) The Ecological evidence report has not demonstrated appropriate mitigation or that compensatory habitat can be provided. Specialist input at Appendix M asserts that the methods and outcomes of the acid grassland creation scheme undertaken at the RSPB Minsmere Nature Reserve are highly relevant to the compensatory acid grassland creation at Middlewick.
However, cursory examination of the RSPB scheme shows that the aims, conditions and outcomes are quite different to those of the Middlewick, and this does not therefore provide sufficient evidence for the inclusion of Middlewick in the Local Plan.
See the attached End note 2

None - development should not be allowed to go ahead for reasons stated.

Middlewick is noted in the local plan and should never have been allowed to remain in the plan for development. The fact it is one of the last remaining lowland acidic grassland habitats is critical to wildlife conservation nationally. Colchester already has an oversupply of housing (quoted variously as 900 or 1000) building 1000 more will just be excessive and wasteful and attract more people to live in an already overpopulated and overdeveloped town whose public transit system is woefully inadequate.

As stated previously the site should be left as, protected with country park status.

There is no logic with this development.

The local plan states it is a Local Wildlife Site with protected species, a unique Lowland Acid Grassland.

Any development would have an large impact on the local area now and for future generations.

Causing pollution, congestion and depriving the population the opportunity to enjoy the space for their own leisure purists. The development would have a negative impact on people's physical and mental health.

It is not consistent with UK's green credentials and policy to develop this site.

Because of the overcrowded road network the site is not effective for development.

Retain Middlewick Ranges as green open space

Middlewick Ranges is noted in the local plan itself, as a Local Wildlife Site with protected species. As such, it should never have been allocated, nor allowed to remain in the
plan.
• 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.

Until the soundness test is satisfied the Middlewick Ranges should be taken out of the Local Plan The appropriate assessments (not desk top asssments) should be applied and correctly before it is put into the Local Plan. The Stantec report came in November 2019 with many inaccuries as pointed out at the hearings and this was their responsibility to get right. There has been little consultation with regards to the development, the bare miniumn and (which is hit and miss whether peopple actually pay attention or miss things published online and through Social Media). This is a consequence of Covid 19 but should not be used as an excuse to push ahead with development where there are so many issues. To make the Middlewick Ranges sound there have been up to 16 modfications to the LP, this is unual in itself. The Save Middlewick Ranges Campaign considers that allowances have been made for this development because it is MOD/DIO land and that it could be repurposed away from housing to protect the environment for future generations. We now have an experienced solicitor on board and we will go or Judicial Review if necessary.

There appears to have been an overlook by both Colchester Borough Council and the Inspector to recognise that Lowland Acid Grassland is a UK Biodiversity Action Plan habitat and as such is a top priority for wildlife conservation nationally. 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.
- consistent with national policy
- based on proportionate evidence
- effective
- positively prepared.

I am submitting my objection to the building of houses on Middlewick.
MM35 - Housing Allocation.
As I look around Colchester after living in the town for 74 years, I am concerned with the amount of building that has been going up over the past ten years. I know there is an allocation specified for Colchester to build, but you have gone beyond these figures. The amount of houses alone at Stanway and Severalls old grounds must cover these figures for years to come, they are not needed on Middlewick.
MM36 - Traffic and Transport.
How another 1000 houses with at least two cars per home is going to impact on the roads is beyond me. The only two roads into Colchester are Mersea Road and Old Heath Road. At the time of submitting this there is congestion every day on these roads, there is no other way into town from Mersea and Fingringhoe, Abbot’s Road only leads to these two roads, if trying to get to the Hythe there are traffic jams trying to get to Whitehall Road, where if the roads aren’t flooded the traffic is horrendous, this is not good for the environment at all, surely you must see this.
MM37 - Biodiversity and Wildlife.
Middlewick is full of the most beautiful wildlife you could want and that the world needs to keep, to many species are being lost to the destruction of open spaces, the deers foxes badgers running free is a wonderful thing and you want to destroy all this for 1000 houses, once you have dug this up it will never be replaced, the beautiful grasses for the butterflies the trees for nightingale which are so rare, the planet needs plants and wildlife to survive and the way we are going these are going to disappear.
MM38 - Environmental.
The pollution that will be thrown out by more cars on these road will be devastating. The fumes from the cars and busses will cause major problems to people already suffering from bronchial illnesses. Overpopulation is a big problem, Colchester is a small town, there are so many building going up we will be gridlocked, as soon as there is a problem on the A12 the whole town comes to a standstill, the roads are too small coming into town from this area. We are having trouble already with the sewage, it is unable to cope with more buildings, where is the waste going, we just haven’t got the resources. Children soon won’t have any open spaces left to enjoy, this must stop.
MM40 - Landscape.
This is the most beautiful piece of land left in this once beautiful town. The peace it gives people to just walk and enjoy the wildlife around them. The space to be able to breath fresh air, to see wildlife and hear the birds, after the most terrible last eighteen months, this was a place to go to escape the horror to have a little piece of mind, you cannot destroy this, the beautiful trees that have been growing for hundreds of years, these will never be replaced, please reconsider.
MM45 - Biodiversity Net Gain.
I cannot for one second imagine how you would leave this beautiful piece of countryside in a measurable better state than it was beforehand. How can you even think of being able to substitute the beautiful trees grasses with replacement twigs which would take hundred of years to grow. You would be covering the place with concrete. There is nothing you can do to improve this only destroy everything.
MM46 - Long Term Management and Mitigating.
I understand that there has to be five years of monitoring the habitat before any plan is to be considered, if after five years of monitoring of growth and development of the habitat then the project is discussed, I would ask has this been done, you can’t just decide to build without a independent source. This cannot be pushed under the carpet.
MM47 - Scope
I would ask have up to date surveys been taken? as I understand outdated ones are being used, these are not sound and a independent one is urgently needed.
I would like my objection to be put forward with all the others, and please reconsider this terrible planning.

write to strongly object to any building development on Middlewick Ranges for the following reasons:

It is detrimental to:
1. Wildlife (damage and displacement, disrupting eco balance)
2. Air quality (traffic congestion)
3. Water supplies (shortage)
4. Sewage and surface water management (additional local river pollution and flooding which is already bad)
5. The human need to have the benefit of green open spaces for general welfare and mental health.
As any intelligent person knows, the above reasons for not building on Middlewick Ranges are only too apparent.
Colchester has and is doing its bit for the housing shortage and it's time we stopped building houses and concentrated on protecting the Environment.

Middlewick ranges needs to be removed from the plan as the process by which the site was assessed and identified as suitable does not meet with the four soundness tests as set out in paragraph 182 of the NPPF

Acid grassland is a nationally important habitat and a UK Biodiversity action plan habitat, as such, a top priority for wildlife conservation nationally. The site is one of the last significant remaining pieces of undisturbed lowland dry acid grassland, formerly widespread in the area, several species found are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Middlewick ranges is noted in the local plan as a Local wildlife site with protected species and as such should never have been included in the plan. The Local plan is not: consistent with National policy, based on proportionate evidence, effective, positively prepared.

MM38
This build will seriously damage the only green lung in this area to the detriment of the Residents on three sides of the Ranges. There will be nowhere close enough to enjoy nature, breathe clean air, for children to play safe from traffic, to walk dogs, without resorting to the car to go further afield to other open spaces. The wildlife will either leave due to the destruction of their habitats, or they will die off. Middlewick Ranges are adjacent to an SSSI, and site noise and upheaval will be detrimental to the SSSI.
MM35
Air pollution in Colchester is already above Governmental safety guidelines, and especially so on Mersea/Abbott’s Road. Colchester is one of the most polluted towns in the country, and one of the most built up too. There is not the infrastructure to cope. In the last five years 25,628 people have moved into the Colchester area. In the last decade or so seven hospitals have been sold off to housing developers. Severalls,
Essex County, St. Mary’s, Myland, Heath, Essex Hall and the Maternity Hospital. We now have ONE, Colchester General which is frequently overwhelmed, as are GPS, Dentists, schools.
MM36
Traffic congestion is a big problem without more vehicles adding to it, plus ten or more years of dust, dirt, and noise from heavy plant machinery polluting the air further. Entering and exiting the site will cause major congestion and disruption on Abbots/Mersea Road and surrounding roads. In the rush hours it can take over an hour or more to get to work across town to the hospital and other employment, and congestion is ever present where development is ongoing now.
MM37
Middlewick Ranges is a Designated Wildlife Site and contains very rare acid grass which is vital for the survival of certain invertebrates and flora, many of whom are protected species. This lowland acid grass and Heath have remained undisturbed for hundreds of years. There needs to be another up-to-date Ecology Report. The plants and wildlife there will not survive the loss of their habitat. To create acid grass will take many years, may not be successful and the wildlife will die off
MM40
We need to get the Middlewick Ranges reclassified to incorporate the acid grass as it is not all just ‘farmland.’ Many will not want to live within the vicinity of the electricity pylons, either from fear of their effect close up or because they are an eyesore.
MM45
Middlewick Ranges are referred to as ‘a farmland plateau. It is acid grass/Heath.
MM46
It will be impossible to mitigate the upheaval/damage to the habitats of the wildlife. Why was so little made of the fact the Middlewick Ranges are a Local Wildlife Site with protected species. Will the Skylarks wait any number of years for acid grass to be created? and that is just one example. Where will the wildlife go during the intermediary period? Some will possibly go to the adjacent SSSI but most will die off.
Has the wider effect of chemicals been soundly investigated? What guarantees will there be if the Management Company fails?
MM47
The aims for this site are not achievable. They are not in the interests of the Wildlife or the surrounding residents both from a physical and mental health point of view. There is also the fact that Middlewick Ranges were added to the Local Plan without due process taking place.

Do not build in The Wick, keep it all for public use. If the council is serious about its Climate Emergency and the Governments statement about keeping green spaces take the Wick out of the Local Plan

There is already too much traffic in the area surrounding The Wick.The Wick is full of wildlife, flowers and trees, if they are not badly impacted by the development itself, they will be disturbed or destroyed by new residents or diverted footpaths etc.As a boy I was able to roam over all the woods and fields in The Wick and want my grandchildren and great grandchildren to be able to do the same. We need to keep a clear separation between old heath, Barnhall,Monkwick and Blackheath. We do not want these historically seperated parts of the Borough to be merged as a result of more and more house building

The Middlewick Ranges development should be considered to be taken out of the LP2 by the Inspector as unsound at this time. Although developments are taken in favour of the developer, this allocation is more in favour of the MOD and many processes for the LP2 have been overlooked because of this. This development will go to Judicial Review and any masterplan put in will be rigerously objected to. This is not just important to the area but also for developments on green land which is a designated protected area across the UK particularly where the Government has now stated they will not build on green land.

There was 3 and half years between the consultation and hearings with techincal reports and council's reports updated directly before the hearings took place.
The process by which the site was assessed and identified as suitable does not
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.

I think it should become a country park

The green space that will be lost and the impact of more pollution in the area. The roads cannot sustain more traffic. I know this as I travel regularly down the Mersea Road. We need more trees , natural space for people to go for mental well being. Not more houses and concrete. I see many people enjoying walking on the range, where will they go? They will have to get in their car to find somewhere else to walk = MORE POLLUTION. Please don’t take that green lung away from us.

No development will be permitted on this land.

Have CBC and the Inspector overlooked the fact that acid grassland is a nationally important habitat that should be protected for the enjoyment of future Colchester residents? Middlewick Ranges is recognised in the eLP as a LWS with protected species and, as such, should never have been allocated, nor allowed to remain in the plan. In view of the strength of feeling with regard to this important site please will CBC listen to the pleas of its residents and plan to retain this area, in its entirety, within the strategic plan.

The Wick should be removed from the Local Plan completely.

"The built footprint of the development has been sited to minimise the effects on protected habitats and species". Any development will have a devastating affect on all habitats and species which make The Wick their home. CBC has declared a climate emergency, and to build houses on a special area of land in an overpopulated part of Colchester would be shameful act, and in total opposition to the local resident's wishes. We are not NIMBY's, but concerned residents who want the council to work for them, not against them for once.

Cancel

Lowland acid grassland is a top priority for wildlife conservation nationally. There are species there that are protected under the wildlife and conservation act of 1981

The local plan is unsound and 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.

It's failed to recognise that acid grassland is a nationally important habitat. Lowland Acid Grassland is a UK Biodiversity Action Plan habitat and a top priority for wildlife conservation nationally. The site is one of the last significant remaining pieces of undisturbed lowland dry acid grassland/heath, formerly widespread across the region. Several plant, invertebrate and bird species found in acid grassland are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Middlewick Ranges is noted in the local plan itself, as a Local Wildlife Site with protected species. It should never have been allocated, nor allowed to remain in the plan.

It should be made clear in the definitions that where improvements to cycling are referred to later, these improvements should follow the spirit and letter of LTN 1/20,or its successor documents

First, there is no mention in the document (1 of the Governments latest cycling standards,LTN1/20(2). Instead, reliance is made on agreements between the Highway Authority and The Council, c.f Policy SC2ii?MM47. However ,neither organisation has implemented LTN 1/20 and such agreements continue to yield infrastructure that fails to enable cycling for any but the hardiest. Let alone all eg 8-80 yrs, as aspired to in Gear Change (4). It should be made clear in the definitions that where improvements to cycling are referred to later, these improvements should follow the spirit of the letter of LTN 1/20, or its successor documents.
Second, The Councils Cycling Delivery Strategy SPD (DM 21iii) and the Colchester Orbital (eg SC2iv/MM47) are references to inform cycling improvements. Yet the former is nearly 10 years old, pre-LTN1/20, and seems to be routinely ignored, while the latter is primarily a leisure route. Although its clear that for the foreseeable future the Local Cycling Walking Infrastructure plan ( LCWIP(12)) currently being drawn up will be the focus for strategic improvements to the utility cycling network, its not mentioned in the Local Plan,
At the least , it should have a parity of esteem with the Cycling SPD and Colchester Orbital.
Documents reference:
Colchester Local Plan- Tracked Changes
https://consultations.essex.gov.uk/sustainable-travel-planning-team/lcwipconsultation/
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycle-infrastructure-design-ltn-120
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycling-and-walking-plan-for-england
Colchester Cycle scape-link not working

The Middlewick site allocation should be removed from the Plan and it should be protected as a Wildlife Site.

Allocation of Middlewick for development is inconsistent with the Plan’s Environmental Policy ENV1.
This site forms one of the last significant remaining pieces of Lowland Dry Acid Grassland. It is a nationally important, rare, UK Biodiversity Action Plan habitat which should be protected in line with ENV1 and national planning guidelines. It is a top priority for conservation nationally.
The SLAA was not carried out according to PPG and the site should have been rejected early on in the process.
The site cannot support sustainable development. The significant harm to protected wildlife and habitat would outweigh any benefit of development.

Throw out this development proposal based on the reasons given above so fuure generations can appreciate Middlewick for it's unique qualities.

Middlewick is a local wildlife site, protected, and it shouldnever have been allowed onto the local plan in the first place. Several protected species are found in acid grassland and this is one of the last remaining pieces of undisturbed lowland dry acid grassland/heath, which used to be common inthe region.
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.

Middlewick Ranges should never have been in this plan as a site with protected species.

I cannot see any mention of the fact that this is lowland acid grassland, a very quick internet search shows that this is Priority Habitat and that several species of plants and wildlife found in such habitats are protected.

Scapula the lot it’s not needed and certainly not wanted

There is no way you can provide all this without wiping out all this beautiful area. You have no idea on the impact this is going to do.

The appointment, by the developer, of a suitably qualified and experienced nature conservation management organisation as a partner to take forward the habitat conservation, creation and management of the development is for 30years only. This should be forever

The site is one of the last significant remaining pieces of undisturbed lowland dry acid grassland in the region.
Middlewick Ranges is noted in the local plan itself, as a Local Wildlife Site with protected species. As such, it should never have been allocated, nor allowed to remain in the plan.
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 or positively prepared.

POLICY SC2 MIDDLWICK RANGES
In its letter to the CBC Local Plan Examination in April 2021, specifically in respect of Middlewick, Colchester Natural History Society (CNHS) wrote: “Britain is reportedly the worst of the G7 nations for protecting flora and fauna. It is reported that 40% of species have declined in Britain in the past 50 years. This coincides with an estimated 90+% loss of wildflower meadows since the 1940’s”.
CNHS is deeply concerned that Middlewick will add to those statistics despite the Modifications sought.
LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
Assuming the inspector’s ‘Main Modifications’ to be incorporated into CBC’s Local Plan, Policy ENV1 part C. Biodiversity and geodiversity would now read:
“Development proposals where the principal objective is to conserve or enhance biodiversity and geodiversity interests will be supported in principle. For all proposals, development will only be supported where it:
(i) Is supported with appropriate ecological surveys where necessary; (it is clear that the Modifications imply that allocation to housing on Middlewick did not comply with this) and
(ii) Where there is reason to suspect the presence of a protected species (and impact to), or Species/Habitats of Principal Importance, applications should be accompanied by an ecological survey assessing their presence and, if present, the proposal must be sensitive to, and make provision for their needs and demonstrate the mitigation hierarchy has been followed; (it is clear that the Modifications seek complete, effective ecological surveys that demonstrate achievable mitigation, but see (iii) below) and
(iii) Will conserve or enhance the biodiversity value of green land and brownfield sites and minimise fragmentation of habitats; (it was overwhelmingly demonstrated at Examination that proposed acid grassland mitigation is simply not achievable within the required timescales, nor indeed in the lifetime of the new Local Plan) and
(iv) Maximises opportunities for the preservation, restoration, enhancement, and connection of natural habitats in accordance with the UK and Essex Biodiversity Action Plans or future replacements; (not achievable, see point at (iii) above) and
(v) Incorporate beneficial biodiversity conservation features, measurable biodiversity net gain of at least 10% in line with the principles outlined in the Natural England Biodiversity Metric, and habitat creation, where appropriate. (The acid grassland habitat cannot be achieved in the Local Plan lifetime so the biodiversity net gain criteria will not be met)
Proposals for development that would cause significant direct or indirect adverse harm to nationally designated sites or other designated areas, protected species, Habitats and Species of Principal Importance will not be permitted unless:
(i) They cannot be located on alternative sites that would cause less harm; (this was not demonstrated in the case of Middlewick’s acid grassland) and
(ii) The benefits of the development clearly outweigh the impacts on the features of the site and the wider network of natural habitats; (the benefits of the development are not clear as CBC over-achieved its previous building target and Middlewick did not feature in its Preferred Options to achieve new targets, and impacts on the site and wider network of natural habitats were not adequately surveyed or assessed by CBC) and
(iii) Satisfactory biodiversity net gain, mitigation, or as a last resort, compensation measures, are provided. (See point made at (v) above, biodiversity net gain is not achievable).
Part D, Irreplaceable habitats
“Proposals that would result in the loss of irreplaceable habitats such as …. will not be permitted unless there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation strategy, to the satisfaction of the local planning authority, exists.”
Following the Inspector’s Main Modifications, the Policy ENV1 has the clear intention of protecting sensitive sites of important biodiversity value such as Middlewick. Whereas the Policy seeks the production of a full ecology survey by a competent organisation, that was not the case at Examination, this does not overcome the fundamental issue.
The key factor is the rare acid grassland area. Qualified and experienced organisations were able to demonstrate at Examination that the suggestion that the acid grassland could be replicated elsewhere within 10 years was critically misinformed. As a consequence, it is reasonable to conclude that Middlewick will always fail Policy ENV1.
If CBC were to accept that Policy ENV1 is ignored, then the Borough will lose an ‘Irreplaceable habitat’ and the biodiversity it supports.
NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF)
It is not the case that CBC’s Policy ENV1 is the only matter that must be met. There is the question of the overarching NPPF. The July 2021 NPPF has paragraphs covering habitats and biodiversity as follows.
179. To protect and enhance biodiversity and geodiversity, plans should:
a) Identify, map and safeguard components of local wildlife-rich habitats and wider ecological networks, including the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites of importance for biodiversity; wildlife corridors and steppingstones that connect them; and areas identified by national and local partnerships for habitat management, enhancement, restoration or creation. (Middlewick is a key element in an extensive network of sites with high biodiversity (e.g., its relationship to Birch Brook and the Roman River Valley, as well as the Colne Estuary and adjacent SSSIs). Allocation of housing to Middlewick clearly contravenes this policy).
b) promote the conservation, restoration and enhancement of priority habitats, ecological networks and the protection and recovery of priority species; and identify and pursue opportunities for securing measurable net gains for biodiversity. (Middlewick acid grassland qualifies for protection under this policy and cannot be replicated in the necessary timespan to achieve biodiversity net gain)
180. When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should apply the following principles:
a) if significant harm to biodiversity resulting from development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused. (See points at 179 a) and b) above, “planning permission should be refused” for Middlewick)
c) development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats… (Middlwick acid grassland) … should be refused, unless there are wholly exceptional reasons, and a suitable compensation strategy exists. (See above, the benefits of development in this case are not clear given that CBC more than met previous housing targets and did not include Middlewick as a necessary site in its preferred options)
182. The presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply where the plan or project is likely to have a significant effect on a habitats site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects) unless an appropriate assessment has concluded that the plan or project will not adversely affect the integrity of the habitats site. (The presumption cannot apply in the case of Middlewick as it has been clearly demonstrated at Examination that an “appropriate assessment” would not find in favour of development.)
SUMMARY
It is clear that in respect of Middlewick, specifically the acid grassland, neither CBC Policy ENV1 nor key components of ‘habitats and biodiversity’ in the NPPF can be met.
Under Main Modification (MM) 37 the Inspector states “The Ecological Evidence Report confirms that the habitats within the site are of high biodiversity value, including 53 Ha of acid grassland…therefore full ecological assessments will need to be undertaken…for all Protected Species and Species of Principal Importance during the appropriate survey season. The Council will also be seeking a minimum 10% biodiversity net gain on the development site... “
Taken together, the constraints on any development required by Main Modifications 37 to 47, Amount to such a powerful acknowledgement of the importance and vulnerability of Middlewick that it is difficult to see how its inclusion in the Plan for housing could have been judged safe. Not only have the required surveys and other procedures not been carried out satisfactorily by CBC prior to allocation, but also evidence from competent independent ecologists and environmental organisations has demonstrated the failure of the MoD’s report to provide practically feasible mitigation or compensation for biodiversity loss on the site.
Given that any developer, or combination of organisations brought together to provide a ‘masterplan’ for the site, would have to surmount such a formidable array of constraints, including a 30-year legal obligation to maintain biodiversity gain, the time, energy, financial resources that would have to be devoted to the task would be both prohibitive and nugatory. Any properly conducted and independently assessed process would certainly lead to rejection.
The danger of allowing the allocations to persist, while leaving actual development decisions to CBC planners is not only the waste of scarce developer and council resources, but also that it leaves the status of the site ‘in limbo’. Whatever formal requirements are made, lack of effective oversight is almost certain to lead to deterioration on the site, loss of biodiversity and ‘planning blight’. In the end it would become vulnerable to development based on greatly weakened ecological status, and the loss of what Essex Field Club specialists regard as the most important site for biodiversity in the whole of the borough.
CNHS respectfully suggests that in respect of Middlewick the Local Plan cannot be regarded as ‘safe’ and therefore the Modifications should require Middlewick to be removed altogether from the Local Plan housing allocations.
If the inspector is not minded to follow this recommendation, then we would draw on MM45, last sentence, and MM 47, final sentence. These both imply that mitigation, on or off-site, should be ‘provided and fully functional’ before any development takes place.
This is an appropriate and necessary condition, given the highly contested nature of the proposed mitigation for the Middlewick acid grassland.
We suggest, as a further addition to MM47:
‘Such habitat should be subject to assessment by independent and competent ecological experts, with clear recognition that no development will be allowed until their judgment is that recovery of species diversity, including protected species, has recovered and 10% BNG has been achieved
Comments on MM24 and MM25 on canopy cover:
The text of these modifications 1. reports, but does not include the third element in the cited canopy-cover study: ‘targets and strategies for increasing tree cover should be set according to the species, size and age composition of the existing urban forest, based upon a ward/district level and land-use assessment’
Current CBC targets are based upon an arbitrary ratio to the population, without preliminary land-use assessments.
We propose inclusion of the cited extract from the Canopy-cover study, with the following addition:
Any planting on public green spaces should be allowed only following survey by a competent ecological organisation to ensure that the planting will not cause harm to existing biodiversity on the site. Proper consultation with local residents should also be a prior condition.
Further, since elsewhere well-documented serious damage to biodiversity has been inflicted by ‘wrong trees in the wrong place’ policies, the paragraph in MM24 beginning ‘A canopy cover assessment will be required…’ should be revised, deleting ‘and deliver biodiversity net gain’. This clause should be replaced by: ‘and be subject to ecological surveys to ensure that there are no adverse consequences for biodiversity’.

Middlewick should be taken off the plans. It has potential without the houses being built on it. It is a wildlife haven and should be allowed to continue to flourish. Make Middlewick a country park and build a visitors centre and then earmark a section for a second cemetery in Colchester for the future. Open space provide benefits to all including quality of air, well being such as mental health, asthmatic sufferers and other ailments which would put less strain on emergency services i.e. doctors and hospitals thus saving costs. Less cars on the roads meaning we can meet the WHO requirements on emissions and allow trees, hedges and grass to continue to absorbed the CO2 emissions whilst releasing tons of oxygen until all vehicles go electric. Widen roads and build filter lanes on Abbots Road and Mersea Road when approaching the mini roundabout and allow the traffic to flow continuously as it is gridlocked everyday. Resurface Abbotts Road and make good as potholes are appearing all the time. Abbots Road and Mersea Road are the main route to South of Colchester, Mersea and all suburban areas. Middlewick a Country Park? - YES, Middlewick a housing development? - NO

Lowland Acid Grassland is a UK Biodiversity Action Plan habitat and as such is a top priority for wildlife conservation nationally.
The site is one of the last significant remaining pieces of undisturbed lowland dry acid grassland/heath, formerly widespread across the region.
Several plant, invertebrate and bird species found in acid grassland are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
Middlewick Ranges is noted in the local plan itself, as a Local Wildlife Site with protected species. As such, it should never have been allocated, nor allowed to remain in the plan.