Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Comment

Representation ID: 13526

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

Hopkins Homes are pleased to see that the Council has identified the land north of
Colchester Road as a site-specific allocation and included Policy PP43 within the Preferred
Options consultation draft.
We agree with the Council that the site is a suitable location for future residential
development and can be delivered within the plan period to make a significant contribution to
housing delivery and meeting the housing needs of Colchester.

Please see attached document for the rest of our representations.

Comment

Representation ID: 13978

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

Policy ST1 outlines that a Health Impact Assessment is required for developments of 50 or
more dwellings which is a significant change from the adopted Policy DM1 which requires
such assessment on developments of 100 or more dwellings.
The consultation document is unclear as to why the threshold has been reduced and fails to
justify this change. Without clear justification, we are concerned that the Policy adds
additional and unreasonable burden on developments which are promoting a lower quantum
of units.

Comment

Representation ID: 13979

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

The variety of Large, Medium and Small settlements identified in the hierarchy ensure that
the whole plan area can accommodate growth and development over the plan period to
sustain the thriving communities in the area. Many of these benefit from a range of services
and facilities including education, commercial, sport/recreation and health services and these
will only be sustained through future development proposals and growth.
Hopkins Homes welcome the identification of West Bergholt as a Medium settlement and the
Local Plan acknowledging that this is a settlement to which future growth will be directed over
the plan period

Comment

Representation ID: 13980

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

Table ST5.1 includes a windfall allowance of 2,200 new homes over the plan period which is
approximately 137 dwellings per annum as windfall. The windfall allowance although
potentially reasonable is not guaranteed and with only a limited over supply being planned
for, we are concerned that Policy ST5 may not deliver the quantum of housing required to
meet local needs.

Comment

Representation ID: 13981

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

The Local Plan acknowledges the role of service providers and the partnership approach that
is needed to ensure delivery of infrastructure at the right time in the right place, although this
will need to be translated into site specific policies to ensure allocations are viable over the
plan period.

Comment

Representation ID: 13982

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

We are however concerned that the policy contains a wide variety of criterion which are
similar to other policies prepared at both the local and national level. As such it is uncertain
how the policies will work together and how applicants and decision makers will be able to
demonstrate conformity with the policy requirements.

Comment

Representation ID: 13983

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

The ambition to encourage BNG across the plan area alongside future development is
welcomed and acknowledged and provides certainty alongside the national legislation and
requirements.
Policy EN2, in part could be considered to be repeating national policy but we welcome the
BNG sites that are identified in the policy which provide opportunity for offsite units to be
purchased where available.

Comment

Representation ID: 13984

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

We agree with the need to provide relevant information and detail in relation to ecology but
suggest that Policy EN3 takes into account the time scales for determining applications and
how that can interact with the necessary survey windows and times for assessments
throughout the year. Policy EN3 identifies that external expertise may be required to review and validate
ecological survey reports but does not reference the time implications of this and the impact
that may have a decision making. Delays in the reviewing and validation stages can have a
detrimental impact on the timetable for determination of proposals.

Comment

Representation ID: 13985

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

Taking a nature-based solution and designing Sustainable Drainage Systems to seek to
ensure that the area is multifunctional is positive and ensures that development proposals
make efficient use of land. Hopkins Homes has a strong track record of incorporating water
management measures into developments and using permeable paving, grey and rain water
reuse systems for the lifetime of the site broadly in line with Policy EN8.
It is welcomed that Policy EN8 provides for a variety of different measures and will enable
developments to take a site specific and case by case approach to water management on
the site(s).

Comment

Representation ID: 13986

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer

We are concerned however that the requirements of GN1 are too prescriptive and do not
allow for a design and layout which responds positively to the local character and
surroundings.
It is also unclear as to why the minimum 10% gross site area requirement, which appears to
be an arbitrary figure for multifunctional open space, has been selected as there is no
justification or rationale for the approach provided within the consultation document.