as previous

This was previously part of a coordinated 3 site development to enable shared infrastructure, access, drainage and landscape design. This plan failed after permission was given for the Abhora Homes development with increased dwelling numbers to go ahead in isolation. PP4 no longer protects Braiswicks street scenes , would cause unjustified harm to the landscape, biodiversity and historic environment and would be difficult to develop.

I object due to infrastructure issues and there is also no certainty that access will be delivered. The site has environmental and drainage problems and is not deliverable or justified.

Braiswick Residents Association objects to Policy PP4 because it is not justified, not effective, and not consistent with national planning policy.
PP4 is undeliverable as it relies on vehicular and pedestrian access via adjoining land, with no mechanism in the Local Plan to secure delivery or timing. Evidence from the neighbouring Abhora Homes scheme shows a negative residual land value, undermining confidence that infrastructure will be delivered. The site performs poorly in sustainability terms, with unresolved impacts on biodiversity, landscape, and drainage. These long-standing coordination and delivery issues mean the policy fails the tests of soundness and should be removed.

Armoury Farm Livery Stables offers horse-riding lessons, stabling, and other equine facilities, including dressage, saddlery, and livery, allowing visitors to Colchester, Essex, to learn to ride horses. It is located on the other side of the A12. Any impact on the existing green space must take into account equestrians. The riding school will need supportive infrastructure to enable riding out 'hacking' of its liveries and clients. There is strong tourism potential here, with benefits for health and physical activity of horse riding among new residents. It could also encourage residents with horses to move into the area.
Cycleways or new active travel links should be designed as multi-user routes (MURs) to ensure inclusivity for all non-motorised users. MURs function as public highways and are best defined as restricted byways—open to pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists, and users of non-motorised vehicles—or as bridleways, which permit access for pedestrians, horse riders, and cyclists. Bridleways are not just for horses and do not require any additional infrastructure beyond that of a cycleway. They do not cost more money. England has 117,250 miles of recorded Public Rights of Way, of which only 22% are bridleways and just 5% are byways.

Please see LPP Letter dated 12th January 2026

Active travel includes horse riding

See attachment with detailed comments on numerous policies. Anglian Water welcomes the opportunity to contribute comments on the Draft
Local Plan for Colchester City Council. We consider that the Plan is well set out with in relation
to managing flood risk, surface water and wastewater, and enabling water efficiency. We
recognise the challenges for meeting the uplift in housing requirements and the
infrastructure required to help deliver future growth across the district, with the main
focus being Colchester and the larger towns.
We have raised some policy matters relating to consistency between policies addressing surface
water flood risk, water supply, and wastewater, and how these matters are attributed to site
allocation policies.
We look forward to continuing our positive and proactive discussions with the Council in
respect of our comments and the next iteration of the Local Plan, including supporting updates
to the evidence base if required

As Lexden and Braiswick councillor I support Braiswick Residents Association's response:

"PP4 is undeliverable as it relies on vehicular and pedestrian access via adjoining land, with no
mechanism in the Local Plan to secure delivery or timing. Evidence from the neighbouring
Abhora Homes scheme shows a negative residual land value, undermining confidence that
infrastructure will be delivered. The site performs poorly in sustainability terms, with
unresolved impacts on biodiversity, landscape, and drainage. These long-standing
coordination and delivery issues mean the policy fails the tests of soundness and should be
removed."

PP4 (d): Bakers Lane is too dangerous for active travel.

Officer summary of full submission. See attachment with detailed comments on numerous policies:
The overall message is one of support for CCC undertaking a review of the adopted Local Plan to ensure an up to date plan prepared in accordance with the NPPF is in place. ECC will continue the on-going engagement with CCC, through the Duty (or any replacement), to assist progress of the Plan to Regulation 19 (the Pre-Submission Plan), particularly with regards the strategic and cross boundary implications, including cumulative issues and opportunities arising from growth to ensure that the infrastructure requirements are identified, quantified, costed and phased where appropriate. ECC service areas have clearly outlined where further collaborative work/assessment needs to be undertaken (e.g. education provision and ongoing transportation modelling) to refine and resolve an issue; and ECC will continue to be engaged, alongside NH, on the proposals which have an impact on the A12 strategic transport corridor, in particular A12 junctions 25 to 28, A12 widening and junction improvements, and the A120 Corridor Maks Tey to Braintree.

There is support for the Draft Plan’s vision which covers environmental, social and economic needs and emphasises healthy living environments and green networks, environmental protection and economic growth. There is support that the mandatory housing target will be met in full and exceeded over the Plan period in accordance with the NPPF, and that future employment needs will be met (noting that some clarifications are sought) by providing a range in scale of additional employment land supply. ECC provides strong support for policies related to net zero carbon (in operation and embodied), water efficiency, health and well-being, and the environment (green and blue infrastructure and BNG. Recommendations are made throughout the response on policy wording (including policy omissions) and justification to strengthen clarity, effectiveness and delivery.

There is strong support for the inclusion of site-specific Place Policies and references to infrastructure requirements, but these will need to be reviewed and confirmed with ECC following this consultation and the agreement of a final spatial strategy by CCC. It is noted there are some omissions in the Draft Plan such as the allocation of a new secondary school. On this issue, ECC acknowledges the requirement is stated in the Infrastructure Assessment Delivery Plan (Stage 3) for site allocation PP18 Land North of A120 Marks Tey; and in the Infrastructure Topic Paper prepared by CCC, where Appendix A lists the infrastructure requirements for the preferred options site allocations (including those for education). Land for the secondary school (and all education requirements) will need to be allocated in the Pre-Submission Plan.

The review of the IDP and full plan viability assessment are key documents for ECC engagement and input following this round of consultation. The Viability Assessment will need to be reviewed following consultation to ensure it can align with the most up to date evidence relating to the EPOA net zero development policies and its viability evidence. Mention is also made in the response to specific localities and sites – notably Marks Tey and Langham – where discussion needs to take place and recommendations are made to ensure effective delivery if these proposed allocations are taken forward to the Pre-Submission Plan.