Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Newmark's viability methodology underpinning ST3 is flawed. It is skewed towards building on green fields and villages by attributing inflated values to commercial/brownfield city sites. Demand for office-space has collapsed, eg: policy OA4 (surplus commercial land, C2), affecting values (see William Sunnucks' submission). The underpinning evidence therefore conflicts with 3.19.

Furthermore the siloed approach of using a settlement hierarchy to allocate housing is flawed. It fails to account for the impact of large-scale development on small settlements. Mark's Tey and Eight Ash Green allocations negatively impact Aldham (key diagram).

The allocations clearly promote coalescence of villages contrary to ST4 (3.31).

I refer to the General Response and Comment by Colchester City Conservative Councillor Group that states there is an accepted, rising infrastructure funding gap of over £800m.

Infrastructure includes hospitals (3.68). This plan cannot be found sound without enough beds at Colchester Hospital.

I am Colchester City Council’s Local Authority Appointed Governor to East Suffolk North Essex NHS Foundation Trust, which operates Colchester Hospital. NHS experts say the hospital needs 140 more beds within the next 8 years to cope with the extra residents from building 20,800 new homes. Currently there is no Government funding for extra hospital buildings.

I am commenting on Policy PP23 because West Mersea cannot support further large‑scale development. The B1025 is the only route on and off the island, and regular tidal closures at The Strood restrict safe, reliable access for residents, services and emergency responders. Healthcare provision is already stretched, and wastewater infrastructure is at or near capacity. Mersea is surrounded by nationally protected designations (SSSI, SPA, SAC, Ramsar, MCZ) which require stronger safeguards. Policies ST1, ST2, ST7, EN1 and LC1 must be applied more robustly. Development at Dawes Lane is not sustainable without addressing these constraints.

See attached submission.

I support the policy but do not support the Wivenhoe allocation which contravenes this policy. The PP24 allocation in Wivenhoe is situated within our Green Buffer. This ‘Green Buffer’ was set out as a principle in the previous Section 1 plan related to the Garden Community. Wivenhoe was guaranteed a ‘Green buffer’ as a coalescence break. This must be maintained and therefore this allocation breaks existing and proposed policy.

I support the policy but do not support the Wivenhoe allocation which contravenes this policy. The PP24 allocation in Wivenhoe is situated within our Green Buffer. This ‘Green Buffer’ was set out as a principle in the previous Section 1 plan related to the Garden Community. Wivenhoe was guaranteed a ‘Green buffer’ as a coalescence break. This must be maintained and therefore this allocation breaks existing and proposed policy.

I object to the Spatial Strategy including a significant allocation to Wivenhoe as a “large settlement”, due to the current Garden Community allocation within the Wivenhoe boundary. The other “large settlements” do not have a significant allocation within the ward boundary or on the boundary. Due to the previous Section 1 allocation, Wivenhoe should only be required to take a smaller allocation.

I support this policy to provide “open buffers” between settlements. Supporting this policy means that the PP24 Wivenhoe allocation contravenes this policy and should not be accepted.

I object to the Wivenhoe allocation PP24.

This allocation is within the “Green Buffer” and coalescence break between Wivenhoe and Colchester. To maintain the unique character and setting of the settlement of Wivenhoe, this coalescence break must be protected. This break was set out as a principle in Section 1 of the Local Plan when passed, including the Garden Community allocation.

This allocation breaks existing and proposed policies. It would not provide an open buffer/green buffer as promised in a number of policies, and it fails to meet existing protections outlined in the current plan.

Sewage capacity:
The Water Cycle study showed that the Fingringhoe wastewater treatment centre is currently at capacity. This is the maximum number of houses which should be permitted.
Anglian Water acknowledge that an upgrade to the Fingringhoe wastewater treatment centre is needed. However, this is NOT in their current 5 year (2025-30) plan. As this is a fixed term – rather than a rolling plan – the very earliest that this upgrade could happen would be at some point between 2030-35.
As such it would NOT be appropriate to reallocate to Fingringhoe proposed housing from other villages which have large housebuilding allocations in the draft local plan.
Climate change – wildfire risk
The immediate risk of climate change facing Essex is a) sea level rise b) increasing incidents of wildfires to which Essex is particularly vulnerable due to having the lowest average rainfall in the UK. The Fire and Rescue service report into the destruction of a whole street in the village of Wennington on the Essex/London border included a specific warning that such events will occur again “"We know last summer was not a one-off - climate change will continue to give rise to more extreme weather events.”
Villages where there is only a single access road in/out are particularly vulnerable – as if the fire jumps the road, as wildfire frequently do, there is no means of evacuating the section of the village which has been cut off EXCEPT across the fields. This would put the elderly and disabled at particular risk.
The eastern half of Fingringhoe which has several hundred houses is such a situation where the ONLY road in/out – and so the only evacuation route in an emergency is Church Road. As such, this part of Fingringhoe is NOT suitable for any major housing developments – and this should be written into planning policy.

Sewage capacity:
The Water Cycle study showed that the Fingringhoe wastewater treatment centre is currently almost at capacity, with a maximum additional capacity for only 125 houses. As such, this is the maximum number of houses which should be permitted in Abberton/Lanegnhoe and Fingringhoe.
Anglian Water acknowledge that an upgrade to the Fingringhoe wastewater treatment centre is needed. However, this is NOT in their current 5 year (2025-30) plan. As this is a fixed term – rather than a rolling plan – the very earliest that this upgrade could happen would be at some point between 2030-35.
As such it would NOT be appropriate to reallocate to Abberton/Langenhoe proposed housing from other villages which have large housebuilding allocations in the local plan.
Hedges and trees
It is important that hedges and trees should be retained – including the hedge which forms the parish boundary between Langenhoe and Fingringhoe – and is the eastern boundary of the proposed site.
Landscape
Whilst the edge of Langenhoe village can just be seen from locations to the south such as Mersea, any additional housing development to the south of the village, including to the south of Fingringhoe road – would adversely impact the rural landscape character to a significant extent.
Village envelope
The draft local plan has proposed extending the Langenhoe village envelope to take in both Langenhoe cricket ground and a number of houses, including two which are on Abberton Road, Fingringhoe – and so in Fingringhoe Parish. It is difficult to see any justification for extending the village envelope in this way without first consulting either the parish council or the local residents concerned.
Future risk of ribbon development
The proposed site is not ideal as it is currently the green space between the villages of Langenhoe and Fingringhoe. If the proposed site is given the go ahead – the council needs to take specific steps to ensure that green space exists between Langenhoe and the western part of Fingringhoe. If it failed to do this- it would risk ribbon development running from the south part of Peldon road, Abberton – right through to the eastern end of Fingringhoe – a distance of 5KM.