Ensure pavement along A1124 is extended from Wakes Hall Business Centre south to Wakes Colne village hall. Buildings are in keeping with location. Sufficient green space is included for wildlife and children.

Development should be in keeping with the rural and village feel - vernacular design considerations. The proposal of 200 houses seems excessive considering the size of the village along with the additional demand on schooling, doctors provision and number of increased road use by cars. Another salient point for consideration is the issue of water and sewerage management and how that will be managed within a system that is already struggling to cope. To conclude site access needs to be carefully and safely managed to negate the impact of additional vehicles in the area.

This is a large development on an area of open countryside. The volume of traffic and people added to the village is massive- this proposal would double the size of the village which seems disproportionate. A smaller proposal of no more than 50 homes would be preferable but doubling the size of the existing residents and the increased pressure on resources and road network is not welcome.
This is in a Dark Sky zone. Light pollution will ruin the local observatory ability to function.
Why has this landowner submitted this land as a proposed site? Probably to line their own pocket- not for the welfare of the village- this will devalue existing homeowners property whilst lining his own pocket.

What about water run off into the river? The river floods- with this increased building work the water runoff from all the residents this will get worse. The existing land at this location acts as a soak during rain - this will be lost as as the rivers are not maintained this will lead to more flooding.

With the reduction of available East Anglian Farm rides locally, horse riders are being pushed onto local lanes. the increased traffic on the roads as a result from this development will put horse riders at risk, we have a thriving equestrian community in the village. Will the landowner open up all his private bridleways on his own land to support the bridle path network? He hasn't so far.

Whilst the highways agency may well approve the entrance to the site in the future when will the surrounding road network be upgraded and or maintained properly to support the increased traffic proposed by this site? Would the bridge in Aldham Ford Street be reinstated to a 2 lane crossing? Probably not! Will the pot holes caused by the increased traffic be fixed quicker - again probably not! Will access onto the A120 be improved from Great Tey?

The proposed change in traffic down Station Road will result in an increase in traffic down Spring Gardens lane as people try to avoid the increased distance. Sat nav loves taking people the quickest route and Spring Gardens lane will be quicker for people coming from Bures to Colchester - how will the plans address this? This will be dangerous for residents living down that lane as this lane is unsuitable to be used as a rat run.

This proposal is too big, whilst the field is big, the whole space should not be developed even with the 'green space' allocation included. A small proposal of 50 houses would be more in keeping but 200 houses is excessive - smaller sites around the village would be ideal but i acknowledge that change is inevitable but this is greedy and disproportionate.

Too Big - doubling the size of the village
Increased risk of flooding for the river due to increased surface run off.
Increased traffic, risk to local equestrians and extra pressure on roadway and railway maintenance.
Proposed traffic/road layout will move the problem to unsuitable lanes.
Light pollution
Wholly disproportionate. It shouldn't be more than 50 homes.

The proposed development is excessively large, effectively doubling the village’s size. It would raise the risk of river flooding due to increased surface runoff and bring significantly more traffic, posing dangers to local equestrians and increasing strain on road maintenance. The suggested road and traffic layout would merely push congestion onto narrow, unsuitable lanes. In addition, the scheme would create unnecessary light pollution and alter the rural character of the area. Overall, the scale is wholly disproportionate to the village’s needs; the development should be reduced to no more than 50 homes.

as previous

I am writing to register my strong objection to the proposed development of 200 houses in Wakes Colne. While I recognise the need for appropriate and sustainable housing across the region, this proposal is fundamentally unsuitable for Wakes Colne and conflicts with several core planning principles.

1. Disproportionate Scale and Harm to Rural Character
Wakes Colne is a small rural village with limited infrastructure and a distinct landscape character. The addition of 200 houses would represent a dramatic and disproportionate increase in the size of the settlement. Such a large scale development would:
• Overwhelm the existing village identity
• Lead to significant urbanisation of a rural area
• Erode the open countryside that defines the Colne Valley
This scale of development is inconsistent with sustainable rural growth and would permanently alter the character of the village.

2. Insufficient Local Infrastructure

Wakes Colne does not have the infrastructure to support a development of this magnitude. Key concerns include:

Highways and Traffic

• The A1124 and surrounding rural roads are already under pressure.
• Additional traffic from 200 households would worsen congestion, increase accident risk, and create safety issues for pedestrians and cyclists.
• Public transport provision is limited, meaning most residents would rely on cars.
Education
• Local schools are already near or at capacity.
• There is no clear plan for accommodating the significant increase in demand for school places.
Healthcare
• GP surgeries and healthcare facilities in the area are overstretched.
• No provision has been made for expanding medical services to meet increased demand.
Without substantial and guaranteed infrastructure investment, this development would place unsustainable pressure on essential services.
3. Environmental and Ecological Impact
The proposed site is part of a sensitive rural environment that supports a variety of wildlife. Concerns include:
• Loss of natural habitats and biodiversity
• Increased pollution (noise, air, and light)
• Potential harm to local watercourses and drainage systems
large scale development in this area risks irreversible ecological damage.

4. Flooding and Drainage Concerns

Much of the Colne Valley is vulnerable to surface water flooding. Adding 200 houses, hardstanding, and roadways will:

• Increase runoff
• Heighten flood risk for existing properties
• Place additional strain on drainage systems that are already limited
The proposal does not demonstrate robust mitigation measures.

5. . Lack of Sustainable Transport Options

Wakes Colne has limited public transport links, with infrequent bus services and a small railway station shared with Chappel. A development of this size would:

• Increase car dependency
• Contradict sustainability objectives
• Add to carbon emissions in a rural area with few alternatives

This is contrary to national and local planning policies promoting sustainable travel.

6. Failure to Align With Local Planning Policy

The proposal appears inconsistent with Colchester’s Local Plan, which emphasises:

• Proportionate growth
• Protection of rural communities
• Directing major development to sustainable, well serviced locations


Wakes Colne is not identified as a suitable location for large scale housing expansion.

-Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above—disproportionate scale, inadequate infrastructure, environmental harm, increased flood risk, and conflict with planning policy—I strongly object to the proposed development of 200 houses in Wakes Colne.
I urge the Council to reject this application and instead focus on housing growth in locations that are genuinely sustainable and supported by appropriate infrastructure.

This proposal for 200 new houses in Wakes Colne is wholly unacceptable.
This development is not driven by genuine local need but by outside commercial interests. Granting this scale of housing will irreversibly destroy the essential character and rural feel of our historic village, overwhelming existing infrastructure and services.
While we acknowledge the need for some smaller-scale, locally-focused housing, a massive, indiscriminate development of 200 units on a greenfield site constitutes over-development and must be rejected. This is development by mass intrusion, not community requirement.

Village does not have infrastructure or sufficiently good access to sustain development on this scale. Build on the sites of empty units -
Tollgate/Colchester High Street where more amenities exist

No description of provision for schooling and healthcare. Should be considered for this location. Climate change doesn’t appear sufficiently covered - what is the provision for energy? This location is not on the gas network. How will the properties be heated? Will heat pumps and solar panels be required? Pedestrian provision for station road should be a proper raised pavement suitable for the safety of children walking to school and using the station in dark evenings. Increased traffic on the A1124 should be avoided and further speed measures implemented. Cars and lorries regularly over the 30 limit through the village.

The site is located within close proximity of the Grade II* Church of All Saints (LEN 1225059) and the Chappel Conservation Area.

Initial assessment

While development at this site may be acceptable, a proforma Heritage Impact Assessment will help to confirm the site’s suitability from a historic environment perspective and to identify appropriate mitigation measures or opportunities for enhancement. The resulting recommendations should then be incorporated into criteria ‘j’ of the policy.

1. Wakes Colne and Chappel are one community and increasing the number of new houses by 235 (including Swan Grove} will have a dramatic effect on both the built and natural environment that will require substantial mitigation including issues such as:
a) The present village hall will be greatly undersized to meet increased demand.
b) The existing A1124 footway between Lane Road and the village hall is presently dangerous.
c) Limiting the inevitable increase of vehicular traffic in adjacent narrow roads and lanes.
d) New development in Wakes Colne should be located to the south of the proposed spine road.

Overdevelopment for small rural village; inadequate services infrastructure and lack of provision of schools, surgeries and shops, loss of farmland; if granted development however must include rented, social and affordable homes.

Poor highway planning and provision. Restrictions to through traffic in Station Road will, notwithstanding the proposed estate road, result in a very significant increase in traffic in the neigbouring Spring Gardens Road, Chappel which will become a "rat run" resulting in severe detriment to the amenity and safety of residents and which road is entirely unsuited to such increased traffic volumes.

I do not object to the principle of allocating this site, however, I do have some concerns around the policy wording and whether it could be tighter to ensure a high-quality scheme and that impacts are mitigated as and when a developer comes forward.

This site is highly visible across the valley, which I believe sits in a Landscape Character Area. It is therefore disappointing to see that the text around a "landscape led" scheme has been removed and the emphasis around landscaping and landscape impact is lost. Whilst the policy refers to screening, this suggests something around the edge which deals with local views rather than the masterplan as a whole being punctuated with trees and planting to break up development and reflect the wider character of the village, as seen in longer views. Due to the same views, it is important that the development supports "dark skies", with limited lighting as per the rest of the village. If normal street lighting is applied, the development would become overly dominant in night-time views against the backdrop of the valley, woodland and wider village setting.
Given its visibility and prominence from a number of vantage points to the south of the River Colne and the A1124, it is important that any development is carefully sited. A concept plan for this site showing the developable area would be a useful tool to fix intent and ensure the site is not overdeveloped for the context. This approach could be applied to other allocations at a similar scale (and larger) and with similar sensitivities, as seen in the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan, for example. A focus on the field alongside Station Road has some logic for development given the relationship with the village and the station, albeit it remains highly visible. This would to an extent blend in with other existing homes which are interspersed with trees in longer views, hence importance of considering the landscape in the masterplan. I note that there is also no reference to design quality. Whilst I appreciate there will be general design policies, a site such as this will need to go beyond the generic and ensure a mix of house types and materials, especially roofing, to provide visual interest in short and long views. Another repetitive, "box" like development such as the Bellway scheme in Eight Ash Green would not be appropriate here and would not respond to the sensitive context. Where necessary, policy should make specific reference to the rural village context and that design ought to respond accordingly, in order to set expectations at an early stage of design - again this is an approach that could be rolled out across other allocations.

Wakes Colne local plan, with the plan to prevent through traffic down Station Road and a new through road located on the new estate I'm concerned that Spring Gardens Road will become a 'rat run' for those not prepared to use it as it goes in the opposite direction to where they are travelling to. Spring Gardens Road is a rural road, narrow and with blind bends. Used by horse riders, dog walkers and families to walk. Previous issues when A1124 was closed by the viaduct showed this road could not handle the additional traffic and became dangerous.

No thought given to safety of existing residents directly opposite the new junction. 4 driveways directly opposite, with two more <50 metres each side. Junction on a blind bend, against the vision splay of residents, putting vehicular and pedestrian movements at huge risk. Wakes Street known to both Highways and Police as being particularly dangerous; NFU will not insure vehicles registered in this postcode; other insurers have it in their highest risk category. Official accident statistics hugely underreport actual accidents. Crossing road or exiting driveways is already extremely hazardous; increased traffic from the development and from Bures will worsen that.

Local Plan – PP28 Wakes Colne

Summary
The scale of the development is disproportionate to the size of the village of Wakes Colne, being an 80% increase in properties.
Improvements to Station Road need to be very carefully thought through to ensure pedestrian safety and must be a priority if planning goes ahead, not an afterthought.
The programme of construction should be planned to minimise additional traffic along Station Road from construction vehicles.
The assumption that the new residents will use Chappel and Wakes Colne railway station is flawed as this service is already at full capacity during rush hour.

Key considerations:
• Size of the development in proportion to the existing dwelling of Wakes Colne
• Improvements to Station Road are they key consideration, not an afterthought and must be well thought through and implemented ahead of the building of the development to protect the residents and users of the road from the constant flow of heavy construction vehicles
• Capacity of Chappel and Wakes Colne Railway Station
• Mitigating actions in respect of ecology and the environment

General Consideration of the Scale of the Proposed Development
Development to the north of Station Road provides an opportunity to finally resolve the traffic safety issues on Station Road, which residents have campaigned on for decades. However, the size of the development, at ‘approximately’ 200 houses is disproportionate to the size of Wakes Colne, which currently stands at 250 properties, so this will be an 80% increase on the current housing stock, noting that in addition to this development, a further 35 houses are proposed less than half a mile away in Chappel.

Proposals for ways Station Road can be improved:
There already seems to be some confusion over what the plans for Station Road are. The Preferred Options Local Plan as detailed on the City Council website states “Stopping access along Station Road to through traffic”, while more detailed plans presented at the Open day at Wakes Colne village hall on 6th December 2025 state only that the road is to be ‘pedestrianised and through route movements deterred’. Seemingly already watering down the requirements of the Local Plan
Based on the detailed maps shared at the 6th December open day, the proposal for the pedestrian priority on Station Road, with marked paths are welcomed, but the fact traffic will only be ‘discouraged’ from using the road is incompatible with the concept of pedestrianisation. There is a risk that the situation is made worse than it is now as pedestrians may think they are safe in the marked off areas but due to the narrow road and high banking cars will still need to use this ‘pedestrian’ space to pass. Considerations to minimise the traffic issues of Station Road include (in decreasing order of pedestrian safety):
1. Completely closing access at the bottom of the road so it becomes a no-through road. Cars will still be able to access the station at the top and residents will exit at the (new) northern junction. This is also in keeping with the detail of the Preferred Options Local Plan paper.
2. Make Station Road one-way from the bottom of the hill to just below the station entrance – vehicles could still access the station at the north using the new road, but not travel any further down Station Road. This will give pedestrians greater protection as there will be no issue with vehicles passing and will stop the current behaviour of cars racing down the hill, often well in excess of 40mph.
3. Install physical right of way barriers (similar to that by Chappel Church) to give priority to traffic coming up the hill. This will further discourage traffic from using Station Road as a short-cut and using the new road as it is likely to take longer to use Station Road.
4. 20mph limit on Station Road, camera controlled.
5. Speed bumps (may be unpopular with residents due to noise and potential damage to their own vehicles)
6. Signage/directional restrictions (such as left tun only into Station Road) to further deter drivers from using the road.

Ultimately, we need to make using Station Road slower than the alternative of using the new proposed road otherwise drivers (especially ones who know the area or using Sat Navs which haven’t been updated with the new road) will default to the shortest route.
Note that when the development starts, the first priority should be to create the new access off the A1124 and construct the access road. If this is not the case, construction traffic will be using Station Road and will make the situation for pedestrians and residents completely unbearable with dozens of heavy construction vehicles using the narrow road each day.

Concerns in Relation to Failure to Implement Station Road Improvement Proposals
As a resident of Station Road, I am deeply concerned that, as with other infrastructure changes linked to new developments, the proposals for improvements to the Station Road will get bogged down in challenges between the highways and planning systems and the housing development will commence without any tangible improvements to Station Road.
I am not familiar with the nuances of the planning system, but I would suggest that the road improvements become an integral and legally binding element of the development and as noted above, are put in place before the main development commences to avoid exacerbating the current issues for pedestrians and residents of Station Road.

Capacity of Chappel and Wakes Colne Railway Station
There seems to be a naïve assumption that many of the new residents will be using the railway station at Wakes Colne, seemingly assuming it has unlimited capacity. As a regular user of this service, I should note that at rush hour there is barely standing room on the train. As the trains cannot be made any longer (it is already too long for the Marks Tey and Sudbury platforms and commuters have to walk down the train to get off at the front carriages), nor can the trains be made more frequent as it is a single track so unable to have more than one train running at a time, it is likely that potential commuters will end up driving to Marks Tey or Colchester anyway. This is further compounded because the car park is mostly full during weekdays so there is a risk that commuters park on local roads instead, further exacerbating our existing traffic issues.

General Ecology and the Environment
It should be noted that there are natural springs at the northern end of Station Road. Surveys should be carried out to ensure that the new development does not create a flooding risk to the existing properties.
Careful consideration should also be given to street lighting to minimise light pollution. The area currently benefits from dark skies to the north and east.

Wakes Colne is a delightful village of c.200 homes. This proposal will double the size and change it into a small town, irreparably changing its character.
Infrastructure, particularly sewerage, wholly inadequate for current village needs; it will fail completely if housing doubled. Anglian Water already publicly stated it will not be upgraded.
THERE IS NO SAFE PLACE ALONG A1124 WAKES STREET FOR THE ACCESS ROAD JUNCTION. Local resident motorists and pedestrians put at risk

North Essex Astronomical Society has its base, The Munday-Sayer Observatory, in the grounds of property called The Observatory which is approximately 1.6 km from the edge of site “Land West of Station Road, Wakes Colne”

The observatory was built in the 1980s by Charles Munday as part of the British Astronomical Association’s programme of observing for the 1985 apparition of Halley’s Comet. The observatory’s location was specifically chosen after a long search due to its unobstructed Southern view and relatively dark skies. It has been used by North Essex Astronomical Society continuously since 1991. The observatory benefitted from a National Lottery Grant which enabled significant improvements to be made. A full history of the observatory may be found at https://www.northessexastro.co.uk/observatory/

The observatory is in weekly use by the society’s 220 members for both casual observing and structured programmes of observing. North Essex Astronomical Society undertakes public outreach across North Essex, including:
- A monthly Young Astronomer’s Club for children of members and non-members.
- Multi-week structured introduction to astronomy covering National Curriculum requirements at multiple Essex schools.
- A programme of free Public Stargazing Events at Great Notley Country Park which are regularly attended by 300+ members of the public of all ages.
- Outreach events for local youth and community groups including scouts/guides and Essex schools.
- Observing, outreach and educational activities at public events, tourist venues and local museums across Essex.
- Monthly programme of lectures featuring speakers from prestigious academic institutions, open to members and the general public.
- Participation in the national STEM Ambassadors scheme for schools.
- Appearances in local and national media to educate and raise awareness of astronomy.
- Participation in national educational and awareness events such as National Astronomy Week.

North Essex Astronomical Society is the largest astronomical society in Essex and the sixth largest society in the country affiliated with the Federation of Astronomical Societies.

Access to a dark skies observatory is an important factor in attracting and maintaining a sufficiently large membership of experienced amateur astronomers willing to volunteer their time and personal equipment to deliver the above programme. Any significant loss of amenity at the observatory would likely reduce the society’s membership and jeopardise its outreach and educational programme. In addition to supporting local astronomy, our Secretary is the President of Federation of Astronomical Societies, a nationwide organisation supporting over 175 groups whose total membership exceeds 12,000 people.

Should this site be developed, we request that planning conditions be put in place to prevent the use of external lighting to avoid the aforesaid loss of amenity.


198. Planning policies and decisions should also ensure that new development is appropriate for its location taking into account the likely effects (including cumulative effects) of pollution on health, living conditions and the natural environment, as well as the potential sensitivity of the site or the wider area to impacts that could arise from the development. In doing so they should:
a) mitigate and reduce to a minimum potential adverse impacts resulting from noise from new development – and avoid noise giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and the quality of life72;
b) identify and protect tranquil areas which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason; and
c) limit the impact of light pollution from artificial light on local amenity, intrinsically dark landscapes and nature conservation.

We further note that the current government consultation on the NPPF (launched December 2025) maintains the protection of dark skies as a core environmental requirement.

Guidance - Light pollution - Advises on how to consider light within the planning system.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/light-pollution
The section “What factors can be considered when assessing whether a development proposal might have implications for light pollution?” states

• Will the impact of new lighting conflict with the needs of specialist facilities requiring low levels of surrounding light (such as observatories, airports and general aviation facilities)? Impacts on other activities that rely on low levels of light such as astronomy may also be a consideration, but will need to be considered in terms of both their severity and alongside the wider benefits of the development.

The section “What factors are relevant when considering how much the light shines?” states
“The needs of particular individuals or groups will need to be considered where appropriate. These include the safety of pedestrians and cyclists, and the needs of those whose activities rely on low levels of artificial light such as astronomers.”

The CPRE has a light pollution map which shows how dark the sky is at the observatory.
https://www.cpre.org.uk/light-pollution-dark-skies-map/
This map shows Night Light as being in the range of 0.25 – 0.5 NanoWatts / cm2/sr, the second lowest rating.

The Institution of Lighting Professionals has produced a Guidance Note for the reduction of obtrusive light.
https://theilp.org.uk/publication/guidance-note-1-for-the-reduction-of-obtrusive-light-2021/
We would ask that when considering any lighting installation the guidance is referred to.

North Essex Astronomical Society is a supporter of Dark Skies Matter - https://www.darkskiesmatter.org.uk/ Their mission states:
“Dark Skies Matter seeks to reduce the prevalence and harmful effects of unnecessary, artificial light and to protect fragile oases of natural darkness wherever they are still to be found.
Light pollution is the soiling of the twilight and night-time environment by artificial light. The loss of natural night and the damage and waste caused by light pollution affect us all and should matter to everyone.”

Other supporters include the All Party Parliamentary Group for Dark Skies, The Commission for Dark Skies and the Royal Astronomical Society.

We are asking that that should the development go head, the needs of the North Essex Astronomical Society are considered and a good lighting scheme is developed to ensure no loss of amenity.

200 houses west of Station Road & 35 at Chappel is disproportionate with the existing village (Wakes Colne population 550, Chappel similar) & village infrastructure cannot support. Current water supply and sewage pumping station limitations must be addressed prior to any development. Existing local health and dental services inadequate. Link road between Station Road / A1124 needs junction on the A1124 with adequate sight lines, not by a bend. Mini roundabout better than T junction. More homes = more traffic on A1124 and speeding traffic an existing issue that requires effective control. Existing pavement on A1124 requires widening and lighting.

The proposed development does not comply with Policy PC2 Active and Sustainable Travel and Policy PC4 of the proposed local plan.

Point f of PC2 of the local plan requires that the development should be linked to surrounding walking, cycling and public transport networks, and improve connectivity to adjoining areas and key destinations. The proposal does not demonstrate how this is to be done. Key destinations in the villages include the primary school, railway station, bus stops, businesses (shop and pub at Chappel Corner, Wakes Colne Business Park). Connectivity is made difficult by the fact that Chappel and Wakes Colne does not currently have any walking and cycling networks linking these key destinations that would meet modern standards of safety and convenience. Connectivity is further degraded by the fact that the villages lack key infrastructure (GP Surgery, Pharmacy, Supermarkets) which necessitates travel to neighbouring towns to access. The proposal must consider the adequacy of existing or proposed active travel and public transport links to these destinations.

Local residents and the parish councils have campaigned for improved pedestrian infrastructure on The Street, Station Road, Chappel Corner, along with crossing points for the A1124 for around 25 years, but have been consistently refused by Essex County Council. There is therefore deep scepticism about some of the provisions outlined in this proposal. The fact is that infrastructure for pedestrians could be added to these locations now, and not be dependent on proposed developments. If that was the case the development would have a much better chance of being able to demonstrate compliance with PC2.

Key areas for improvement:

The existing footpath from Wakes Hall business park to Chappel Corner is entirely unsuitable, given that it is narrow, often overgrown, and with vehicles regularly passing close by at speed. It is not clear from the proposal whether the development will include essential improvements to this important path, or whether there will be an alternative constructed.

The main thoroughfares (Station Road and The Street) have little to no pedestrian infrastructure, with pedestrians having to share busy roads with motor vehicles for large parts.

The villages are divided by a very busy road, the A1124, with no pedestrian crossing infrastructure beyond a small refuge at Chappel Corner. The proposal to include a Zebra crossing here as part of this proposal are therefore welcome, however, given that Essex Highways have consistently refused crossings here and elsewhere along the A1124, it is difficult to see why they would now change their mind. An additional crossing would also be required at the south western edge of the development to enable access to local bus services.

Local bus services are infrequent and often unreliable. They cannot fairly be described as "high quality" (point g of PC2) or an attractive alternative to a car. The buses are infrequent, unreliable and often full during peak times by the time they arrive at the village. there is no bank holiday service and very little Sunday service. Evening service decreases even further. The only alternative for most is to use a car and the road and Chappel corner in particular is already increadibly busy with parents dropping children for the scholl buses as it is not safe to walk on the pavements. The proposal does not make it clear how residents would access the bus services. Where would the stops be and how would people of various ages and mobilities access them? There is an existing stop outside Wakes Hall business park, but it is rendered inaccessible by the need to cross the A1124.

There is a train station (which currently has accessibility issues due the need to use Station Road, but these may be mitigated as part of the development plan). The train service is currently reliable and regular enough to be of some use, however it is prohibitively expensive for local journeys (to Colchester or Sudbury for example). It is only hourly and stops relatively early at night.It must also be noted that the interchange to the wider network (Marks Tey Station) is not accessible to wheelchair users or others with reduced mobility due to the lack of a step free way to move between platforms 0 and 2. The only way to get between these platforms is to walk up and down more than 20 steps to cross the railway bridge. This also makes it difficult to use with a push chair or young children. Therefore the development fails to address item c of PC2, namely to "Support the provision of infrastructure to encourage active and sustainable modes of travel that are inclusive and accessible to all".

I am extremely concerned at the A1224 junction with regard to the safe pedestrian crossing of the proposed road widening. The existing properties on the southern side of the A1124 currently have to gain pedestrian access to the (currently inadequate) footpath on the other side. It's already a very treacherous crossing and virtually impossible to see oncoming traffic due to the blind bends. Making the road wider at this point is going to increase the length of travel whilst having to deal with traffic using the new junction. Suitable visibility splays for both pedestrians and vehicles are essential for safety.

200 homes grossly excessive in this location and will swamp the village. Attractive rural valley site with no development remotely on this scale in the area.
Proposed new road would intersect with sub-standard (subsiding) A1124 at a location where visibility is limited.
Warped priorities if such overdevelopment is suggested to finance a relief road for Station Road. Lowering speed limits from currently 60 and 30 down to 30 and 20 would achieve far more safety so why has this not happened?
Dysfunctional for sledgehammer of excessive development to take precedence over the most basic road safety measures.

The Wakes Colne Parish Council has submitted a detailed response prepared after consultation with the village. It is a well informed and balanced response which should be taken seriously.

I would highlight the impact that 200 homes will have on both the physical appearance of the village and the community. The Plan should require a master planning exercise for the whole village before any permission is approved.

The proposed development does not comply with Policy PC2 Active and Sustainable Travel of the proposed local plan.

Point f of PC2 of the local plan requires that the development should be linked to surrounding walking, cycling and public transport networks, and improve connectivity to adjoining areas and key destinations. The proposal does not demonstrate how this is to be done. Key destinations in the villages include the primary school, railway station, bus stops, businesses (shop and pub at Chappel Corner, Wakes Colne Business Park). Connectivity is made difficult by the fact that Chappel and Wakes Colne does not currently have any walking and cycling networks linking these key destinations that would meet modern standards of safety and convenience. Connectivity is further degraded by the fact that the villages lack key infrastructure (GP Surgery, Pharmacy, Supermarkets) which necessitates travel to neighbouring towns to access. The proposal must consider the adequacy of existing or proposed active travel and public transport links to these destinations.

Local residents and the parish councils have campaigned for improved pedestrian infrastructure on The Street, Station Road, Chappel Corner, along with crossing points for the A1124 for around 25 years, but have been consistently refused by Essex County Council. There is therefore deep scepticism about some of the provisions outlined in this proposal. The fact is that infrastructure for pedestrians could be added to these locations now, and not be dependent on proposed developments. If that was the case the development would have a much better chance of being able to demonstrate compliance with PC2.

Key areas for improvement:

The existing footpath from Wakes Hall business park to Chappel Corner is entirely unsuitable, given that it is narrow, often overgrown, and with vehicles regularly passing close by at speed. It is not clear from the proposal whether the development will include essential improvements to this important path, or whether there will be an alternative constructed.

The main thoroughfares (Station Road and The Street) have little to no pedestrian infrastructure, with pedestrians having to share busy roads with motor vehicles for large parts.

The villages are divided by a very busy road, the A1124, with no pedestrian crossing infrastructure beyond a small refuge at Chappel Corner. The proposal to include a Zebra crossing here as part of this proposal are therefore welcome, however, given that Essex Highways have consistently refused crossings here and elsewhere along the A1124, it is difficult to see why they would now change their mind. An additional crossing would also be required at the south western edge of the development to enable access to local bus services.

Local bus services are infrequent and often unreliable. They cannot fairly be described as "high quality" (point g of PC2) or an attractive alternative to a car. The proposal does not make it clear how residents would access the bus services. Where would the stops be and how would people of various ages and mobilities access them? There is an existing stop outside Wakes Hall business park, but it is rendered inaccessible by the need to cross the A1124.

There is a train station (which currently has accessibility issues due the need to use Station Road, but these may be mitigated as part of the development plan). The train service is currently reliable and regular enough to be of some use, however it is prohibitively expensive for local journeys (to Colchester or Sudbury for example). It must also be noted that the interchange to the wider network (Marks Tey Station) is not accessible to wheelchair users or others with reduced mobility due to the lack of a step free way to move between platforms 0 and 2. Therefore the development fails to address item c of PC2, namely to "Support the provision of infrastructure to encourage active and sustainable modes of travel that are inclusive and accessible to all".

In the vision you said

Well-connected
- Better public transport corridors to reduce congestion and increase active travel making cycling and walking more attractive.
- Create communities which reduce the need to travel, particularly by car for most of their daily needs

If someone wants to shop they'll most likely require a car to get there. Many residents here have the opportunity to use the train to shop in Sudbury or Colchester but many do not due to the trains only running once an hour. The bus service is also not very often so shopping in Earls Colne is also difficult. Earls Colne is the closest place to go for a bigger shop, the post office is good but doesn't stock many things you need.

However the access to Earls Colne to shop is very difficult for those that need to walk / cycle as it would involve walking along a 60mph NSL road which has currently no footpath / cycling infrastructure.

I feel this being proposed here goes completely against the vision of being well connected as the current infrastructure and location relies completely on the use of car as part of daily life. This is shown by the amount of cars per household of this area.

"Creation of enhanced pedestrian priority route along the lower section of Station Road" is ludicrous this is made part of this development as this work should've been done long before. It has been campaigned about for many years and in 2024 a woman was sadly killed here because of inaction.

I feel the policies proposed do not go anywhere near far enough to encourage active and car alternative travel

Although we appreciate the mitigation planned to preserve the character of the area, the Road infrastructure will cause major disruption and issues with Access to the Lower Green area for residents. The suggested diversion for local traffic will force more of it onto the main A1124. Also, the school and other services have no capacity to accommodate the additional population. It should be noted that local school children currently walk up and down station road to get to/from school, and the added traffic will represent an increased danger to them. There are no pavements for a large part of that journey.

The proper development would fundamentally change the characteristics of this small historical village. The infrastructure is not appropriate, the number of cars and associated traffic would be an accident waiting to happen as there have already been several serious accidents on the road where the proper access is due to be. The local school does not have capacity for the numbers of children this development would bring so the council will be spending £100ks on transporting kids to other local schools. The local gp is at capacity and could not take the increase in patients. The smaller development of 35 houses on Swann grove is far more suitable for a village of this size especially given the much larger expansion in the colchester borough just in the next village on the a1124 at eight ash green

Aldham Parish Council is concerned the allocation of some 3500 new homes in the seven parishes west of Colchester will represent a potential doubling in the population of this mainly rural area over 15 years. The decisions to allocate sites across this area appears to have been arbitrary and have been made without assessment of the cumulative impact on the communities and social infrastructure of these villages, including schools and access to GPs. Furthermore, this cumulative impact will have real effect on the principal traffic routes - A12, A120 and A1124 as well as numerous smaller rural roads that are used extensively as short cuts to avoid congestion and are in reality now part of the highway network, despite their inadequacy. This assessment of cumulative impact also needs to take into account emerging proposals for development on the east side of Braintree District which will further compound the problems. The City Council need to engage with our communities to reassure them that level of development proposed can be adequately mitigated by ensuring the emerging Plan is strengthened and improved before a Reg.19 Draft is published.

It is difficult to see how an enhanced priority route will be created at the bottom of Station Road

At the moment Anglian Water claim they currently don't have sufficient water recycling capacity at Earls Colne for 35 houses let alone 200. This issue needs to be addressed urgently for the site to be deliverable (notwithstanding the statutory right for the developer to be able to connect to the sewerage network.