Comment
Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025
Representation ID: 11333
Received: 09/12/2025
Respondent: Mr Community Campaigner David Barton
Representations are being made with a view to supporting economic growth through the merits of High-Quality style Conservation with the hope of encouraging wider constructive and restorative support through positive and constructive working. It is submitted that TVA should play a key part in any and all policy moving forwards on the grounds of conferring practical benefits be these periodic maintenance, their perceived support from the public, their invaluable contribution to achieving Climate Crisis Targets set local, nationally and internationally alongside their overall cost-effectiveness to key stakeholders alike in terms of Planning and sourcing of raw materials.
as previous
Object
Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025
Representation ID: 11855
Received: 04/01/2026
Respondent: Mrs Nikki Bryant
Our hospital is not coping with current population, our roads regularly gridlocked and this isn't a well connected area, there aren't enough school places at any level for existing residents of Colchester, and then there's a shortage of gps, dentists to serve community. We need to protect our natural environment and value our open spaces that's are rapidly diminishing due to over development Colchester feels like an easy target for developers my village alone is facing yet more over development we won't be a village we only have the problems of a city!
Our hospital is not coping with current population, our roads regularly gridlocked and this isn't a well connected area, there aren't enough school places at any level for existing residents of Colchester, and then there's a shortage of gps, dentists to serve community. We need to protect our natural environment and value our open spaces that's are rapidly diminishing due to over development Colchester feels like an easy target for developers my village alone is facing yet more over development we won't be a village we only have the problems of a city!
Comment
Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025
Representation ID: 13771
Received: 14/01/2026
Respondent: Anglian Water Services
Agent: Anglian Water Services
Anglian Water supports the policy criteria f, g, and h.
As indicated in our response to Policy EN8, Anglian Water will use
opportunities presented by new development to reduce exposure to
pollution risk in the existing sewer network. As such, we expect new
development to exploit all practicable opportunities to reduce surface water
flow to the combined sewer network, in terms of volume and discharge flow
rate. No new surface water connections to the combined sewer will be
accepted.
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
Comment
Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025
Representation ID: 14492
Received: 14/01/2026
Respondent: Essex County Council Spatial Planning
Land at Roberston Van Hire is within a CDA NCOL_03 Abbey Gate, surface water discharge should be at the greenfield 1 in 1 rate and should not be to a foul or combined network. Rainwater harvesting should be considered.
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.