as previous

The site is situated potentially within the setting of the Small multivallate hillfort known as Pitchbury Ramparts Scheduled Monument (LEN 1019959), and several Grade II listed buildings.

Initial assessment

While development here could be acceptable, a Heritage Impact Assessment will be required 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 criterion ‘k’ of the policy.

Oak View Landscapes supports the allocation of land at Pattens Yard, West Bergholt for employment uses and confirms that the site is available, suitable and deliverable within the plan period.

Oak View is committed to enhancing the commercial development of this site, which will support a variety of businesses, provide local jobs and support the rural economy in and around West Bergholt.

The policy requirements relating to access, green infrastructure, landscaping etc can all be addressed through detailed design and engagement with the relevant authorities.

The allocation represents a sustainable and deliverable employment opportunity and is supported as drafted.

This allocation is identified for employment use, but it sits directly on and around the existing stables and Public Footpath 4. The stables are an established rural business that contributes to the local economy, and Footpath 4 provides important countryside access for the community. Any employment development must therefore be designed to avoid harming the operation of the stables, the safety of riders, or the continuity and character of the PROW. These features are critical to the area’s rural identity, and development must protect them and, where possible, enhance access and the surrounding landscape.

West Bergholt Parish Council supports this policy. See Minutes of Extraordinary Parish Council Meeting 07/01/2026.

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

See Full Submission attachment

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.