Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Search representations

Results for Gladman Development search

New search New search

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

1. Introduction

Representation ID: 14081

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

One minor house-keeping comment would be that draft local plans are often very
long documents, and so it is useful for the reader to have access to the whole
document as one, single, PDF file. Unfortunately, the draft plan is not available in this
format and we found it difficult to navigate the document via the website portal,
which requires scrolling through the web pages. A single file that can be downloaded
is therefore requested for future consultations

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Policy ST3: Spatial Strategy

Representation ID: 14183

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

Gladman consider that the draft settlement hierarchy is appropriate for the growth
of the authoritative area for the plan period. The proportionate distribution of growth
is important to ensure that settlements – both large and small – remain sustainable
and that growth takes place in locations which can support it.

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Policy ST5: Colchester's Housing Need

Representation ID: 14184

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

Provision of 21,106 dwellings across plan period (with windfall, commitments, TCBGC and Local Plan allocations). These figures allow for a 308-dwelling buffer from the housing need, equating to a
1.48% buffer on what is needed over the 16-year period. This figure is far too low to
be sustainable. more sites should be identified, particularly
greater number of short-medium sized sites as these assist t with the overall housing need, particularly with delivery in the first few years
of a local plan.
The Council may wish to pursue a higher housing requirement to maximise the delivery of affordable
homes.

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Policy ST2: Environment and the Green Network and Waterways

Representation ID: 14185

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

we question whether the ‘protection’ of ‘strategic biodiversity areas’ is
appropriate (if this is what the policy is proposing), and query whether the Local Plan
should be taking a more balanced approach, which could recognise that development
proposals can often provide the opportunity to secure the long-term management
of green infrastructure

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Policy GN5: Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace

Representation ID: 14186

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

We generally agree with the principle of this policy, however Blackwater Estuaries
Special Protection Area is the main reason for our site in West Mersea not being
allocated for residential development. Given that there are mitigation measures
available under draft policy GN5, it is unclear why the site has been ruled out so hastily.

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Policy LC3: Coastal Areas

Representation ID: 14187

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

Supporting text to Policy LC3 advises that its purpose “is to protect Colchester’s rural and undeveloped coastline from inappropriate development that would adversely affect its rural, undeveloped and open
character…“. However, we question whether circumstances of the Rowhedge Road
site are consistent with these characteristics.

We therefore query how development in this location could adversely affect the rural,
undeveloped and open character of Colchester’s coastline, and how including the
Rowhedge Road site within the Coastal Protection Belt designation is consistent with
these aims. We request that inclusion of the Rowhedge Road site within the Coastal Protection Belt designation is reviewed

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Policy NZ1: Net Zero Carbon Development (in operation)

Representation ID: 14188

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

We disagree with the need for this policy. We would therefore request that this
policy be removed and left for the national building regulations to accommodate.

However, should this policy remain, we would request that instead of all dwellings,
that a percentage of dwellings per site be built out to the standards requested. This would result in net-zero carbon dwellings still being built out, but without the
detriment of unaffordability for those seeking to buy, as ultimately the additional
costs incurred in making dwellings net-zero will be reflected in the house prices and
therefore the fall upon purchaser

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Policy H6: Self and Custom Build

Representation ID: 14189

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

We support this policy. Requesting 2% of large developments to be self/custom build
plots is appropriate, as this is a reasonable number and does not negatively impact
smaller schemes with mandatory self/custom build requirements, as the requirement
is only for schemes of 150+ dwellings. This is provided that the evidence supports
these figures.
We also agree with the 12-month turnaround time on the Self-Build Register, with
sales on the open market taking place after this period should the plot(s) not be
purchased.

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Policy PP7: Land off Bakers Lane, Colchester

Representation ID: 14190

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

Gladman are seeking expert advice for pedestrian connections to the existing footway
on Baker’s Lane. We are also open to the possibility of a safe and appropriate
pedestrian crossing if required. Highways access can easily be obtained along the western boundary of the site, with,
given the limited space along Baker’s Lane, pedestrian footpaths being available
within the site’s boundary as part of a future scheme.

A policy-compliant level of affordable housing will be provided, in a range of sizes
and tenures. The site will accommodate a range of house types and sizes informed
by local need.

Attachments:

Comment

Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Policy PP9: North-East Colchester

Representation ID: 14191

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Gladman Development

Representation Summary:

Gladman is promoting a 97‑hectare site west of Harwich Road in North East Colchester for around 750 homes, forming part of a wider 2,000‑home allocation under draft Policy PP9.
A joint Masterplan Framework with other parties set out the vision, land uses and infrastructure, including a local centre, two‑form‑entry primary school and strategic open space—all proposed on the Gladman site.
Technical studies confirm deliverability, suitable access, active‑travel connections, extensive green space, SuDS, and protection of Bullock Wood SSSI. Gladman considers the site fully deliverable and compliant with Policy PP9 requirements.

Attachments:

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.