Showing comments and forms 1 to 11 of 11

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 11295

Received: 09/12/2025

Respondent: Mr Community Campaigner David Barton

Representation Summary:

TA will be excellent

Full text:

TA will be excellent

Object

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 11838

Received: 03/01/2026

Respondent: Mr John Tring

Representation Summary:

!

Full text:

!

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 12007

Received: 06/01/2026

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Hursey

Representation Summary:

These need to be in the correct location and included on the local plan

Full text:

These need to be in the correct location and included on the local plan

Support

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 12764

Received: 12/01/2026

Respondent: West Bergholt Parish Council

Representation Summary:

West Bergholt Parish Council supports this policy.

Full text:

West Bergholt Parish Council supports this policy.

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 13046

Received: 13/01/2026

Respondent: East Suffolk & North Essex NHS Trust

Representation Summary:

P105

It should be noted that this demographic of people are identified as being areas of health deprivation (in general). Making sure that people with high levels of health deprivation are able to access health services as easily as possible will help to try and reverse this trend.

Full text:

P105

It should be noted that this demographic of people are identified as being areas of health deprivation (in general). Making sure that people with high levels of health deprivation are able to access health services as easily as possible will help to try and reverse this trend.

Attachments:

Object

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 13432

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Mrs Karen Warren

Representation Summary:

1.infrastructure
2.Duty of care to those here with no medical facilities, schools, sewage, emergency services
3.Renowned Wildlife including migration of birds, red squirrel, snakes, species studied have declined, nearly one in six species are threatened with extinction.
4. Severe Coastal erosion
5. Emergency evacuation from the island I.e flooding, Bradwell
6. More residents living in caravans not in the headcount
Please don't ignore the devastation this will cause. We can't cope

Full text:

Mersea island cannot support any further building, we have no doctors, dentist, secondary schools, regular bus or any trains. Sewage is struggling, omotting directly onto oysterbeds. Water pressure is dropping significantly. Environmental and health disaster waiting to happen. In fact, what we do have is flooded roads, pot holes, coastal erosion and an array of rare birds, red squirrels insects and snakes. This island has many documentarys regarding its unique wildlife, bird migration. Mersea island is water stressed and expected to get worse due to climate change, population growth and the need to restore, protect and enhance the natural environment. Mersea is a high flood risk from the sea and rivers and only one small road off the island. In addition to this, Essex water quality is below the national average as a result of storm overflows discharging sewage into the water supply; pollution from fertilisers and traffic Do not ignore what you are destroying. The strood cuts us off from the rest of the country, we have thousands more living in caravans most of the year who are not registered.

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 13447

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Stanfords

Representation Summary:

Stanfords Colchester LLP has submitted detailed representations on this draft policy; please refer to the attached document.

Severalls Lane expansion hasn't been progressed to planning application or delivery since the site opened, despite being a Council-controlled asset, creating a
clear early-years deliverability risk.
• The Tendring–Colchester Borders Garden Community (TCBGC) allocation relies on long-term, phased infrastructure and spans two authorities; delivery of 9 pitches on the Colchester side within the plan period is uncertain.
• NPPF/PPTS require specific, deliverable sites in years 0–5 and developable supply thereafter; currently H7 portfolio over-relies on strategic allocations without robust implementation detail and contingencies.

Full text:

Stanfords Colchester LLP has submitted detailed representations on this draft policy; please refer to the attached document.

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 13541

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Bloor Homes (Eastern)

Agent: Pegasus Group

Representation Summary:

Clarity is required over H7 policy wording "strategic allocations to be finalised through Masterplanning", as providing new pitches as part of C3 residential development would not be supported owing to the amenity and design challenges which may arise; and the potential impact of grouping the two uses could have on the sale of new C3 homes. Bloor Homes encourage the Council to plan proactively and positively for new standalone sites for pitches or further extensions to existing sites.

Full text:

Bloor Homes support and acknowledge the need for the Council and the Local Plan to identify sites for gypsy, travellers and travelling showpeople. Indeed, the need to establish the need for this type of home is set out in Paragraph 63 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Draft Policy H7 states that the need for pitches will be largely met at the proposed Tendring and Colchester Borders Garden Community and the expansion of an existing site at Severalls Lane. The expansion of existing sites is supported by Bloor Homes where there is sufficient land and infrastructure to support the community.

Draft Policy H7 states that “strategic allocations to be finalised through Masterplanning” will also play a role in providing new pitches. Clarity is required as to whether this policy wording means the Preferred Options Local Plan (POLP) (or a future policy document) will make additional site allocations purely for new pitches or if it means providing pitches on proposed site allocations for C3 market housing as identified in the POLP.

Providing new pitches as part of C3 residential development is not supported owing to the amenity and design challenges which may arise; and the potential impact of grouping the two uses could have on the sale of new C3 homes. Bloor Homes encourage the Council to plan proactively and positively for new standalone sites for pitches or further extensions to existing sites.

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 14111

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Emergency Services Collaboration Police Lead

Representation Summary:

The DOCO would request consultation (ideally at RIBA Stage 2) with developers and design
teams regarding any potential new and or existing Gypsy and Travelling Show Person sites.
In doing so, the relevant consultations within Essex Police are made, ensuring that there is
an integrated co-existence between the site, local community, and businesses

Full text:

See full text of the attachment for each policy which in some cases add extra information that couldn't be included fully in the rep summary.

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 14219

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

Representation Summary:

We would advise that Point (c) in the policy text
should be expanded to read
“…located outside areas identified by the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment or the
Flood Map for Planning, as being at high risk of flooding both now and in future”
The policy does not rule out the consideration of new sites where connection to a
mains sewer system is not feasible. Regard should be given to Policy NZ3 and our
proposed additions.

Full text:

see attached

Object

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Representation ID: 14548

Received: 20/12/2025

Respondent: The Gypsy Council

Representation Summary:

Summary: strongly opposes Colchester’s Local Plan proposing 20,800 new homes by 2041, Lack of Gypsy/Traveller pitches/provision, severe infrastructure and environmental concerns. Roads, schools, healthcare, and a single hospital cannot support such growth, while increased building will worsen flooding risks due to reduced land absorption. The plan also includes 15 Gypsy/Traveller pitches, which the author argues is based on outdated assessments and miscalculations, calling for fair allocation and private site options. Collaboration with Tendring District on 7,500 homes adds further strain. The urges Colchester City Council to reject unrealistic housing targets and protect the area’s character and sustainability.

Full text:

Planning Services Consultation on the Preferred Options Local Plan Thank your for your letter dated 26th November 2025.

Having contacted Mr Hughie Smith President of the

has agreed that it would be good lo Respond both in Gypsy Council of which I am an Honorary Member, he
this capacity and also as a house dweller who has lived in Colchester for over forty five years
I am opposed to thee vast amount of houses deemed to

be needed by 2041. the hymn Jerusalem based ON

William Blakes poem 'And did those feet in ancient times'

In England's green and pleasant land comes to mind which describes a vision of a pure ideal England
contrasting will the 'dark Satanic Mills of the industrial age. Colchester will no longer be a green and pleasant land.

if the numbers are CORRECT Colchester cannot cope will this amount of houses - Roads hospital (singular) schools,

Doctors, Dentists etc. Also, we must not forget the climate

which is wetter in the Winter, the land absorbs the extra water and if it is built ON, flooding will be a big problem as is the case at the Hythe at the moment. Where is the backbone of Colchester City Council who have done 9 marvellous job in preparing this Plan under the direction of Central Government. It is time Lo Say NO. these figures are too high and wrong.

Twenty thousand eight hundred new homes in Colchester City between 2025-2041.

Fifteen Pitches for Gypsy /Traveller Community until 2041. this is a wrong assessment, the figures have been taken from the 2013-2033 Assessment- this Local Plan takes us to 2041, another 8 years.

Current unauthorized developments or encampments and

seeking to shay in the area - O. What a surprise as

Gypsy /Traveller people who visit the area and would

like to live here are moved ON as quickly as possible

Therefore cannot be included IN the numbers - this is wrong

Colchester is working Collaboratory with Tendring District

Bach to numbers Council where 7,500 houses are to be built. garden Community

Fifteen Pitches ( wrong figure) up until 2041 Eighteen Pitches - Local Authority to be included in the garden Community

Colchester Local Plan is saying Nine of these will he towards fifteen (wrong figure) needed this is 50% of He pitches and we must not forget there are Local Authority Pitches, but we are working Collaboratory (a word I have seen used many times by Central Government will reference to the Gypsy /Travelling Community and He settled Community) with Tendring District Council. Seven thousand five hundred houses in the Garden Community

Therefore as the Gypsy/Traveller Community is taking

50% of the eighteen pitches leaving only Six to be found ( wrong Number) then regarding the number of houses it should be three thousand seven hundred and fifty hundred. fun Colchester. - 9 50% split and not one thousand, seven hundred. Ten thousand houses according to the Plan on NORTH East Essex Our three thousand seven hundred fifty houses will Cancel all this out as it is too near He border Salary Brook, of the Garden Community. This leaves another - One thousand seven hundred a fifty houses to be subtracted from other Areas in Colchester It cannot be one Rule for one and another for another as we have heard So many times before. 50% Pitches = 50 % houses.

Whilst there is a need for Local Authority Sites we must Remember that our Current Local Authority Sile was a Replacement for the one at the Hythe, with money used from the last Labour Government to build it.
Tendring District Council was unable to provide 9 Local Authority Pitches at the same time after wasting money on Consultants who reported that there was no land available Whilst these is a need for Local Authority siles, as there
is for Council Houses and affordable houses, Here is also a need for land to enable Gypsy/Traveller people to
live o smaller private sites. We have a choice, houses, flats etc Rented private etc. there must be He same choice - Private/Rented.

A quote from a Recent column by Cll, Kevin Bentley - Leaver of Essex County Council - ' it's about putting
communities at the heart decision making. supporting neighbourhoods to shape decisions about their local areas is a key principle of our plan.' More empty words, only time will tell.

Yours Sincerely

MRS C. ATITINS Honorary the Member Gypsy Corneil President Mr Hughie Smith.

Attachments: