Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Comment

Representation ID: 14271

Received: 13/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer Planning

Support for the use of Multifunctional Sustainable Drainage Systems that ensure
efficient use of land is welcomed. Land at Hythe Quay is located within flood zone 2 and 3. Whilst there are sequential test reports that need to be carried out at the site to determine an appropriate development area
on site. We are positive that if collaborated with the Council appropriate mitigation measures
can be identified for the site, in line with similar precautions taken at Hythe Quay.

Comment

Representation ID: 14272

Received: 13/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer Planning

we believe that policies relating to climate change should not be overly prescriptive
and should not apply a blanket approach to additional climate adaptation on all new developments, as this can render developments unviable. We acknowledge the policy has attempted to do this using the table matrix of sites meeting requirements of varying levels. We query whether the policy will allow for viability assessments to be submitted with development proposals to demonstrate that some of these measures are not feasibly
possible at specific sites.

Comment

Representation ID: 14273

Received: 13/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer Planning

Policy H1 should be amended to ensure that it is seen as a starting point for considering proposals and not be an absolute guide on the mix of dwellings to be provided. We are concerned that decision makers will use the details in H1 in a strict manner which would fail to respond to changing circumstances and needs. Policy should introduce greater flexibility to ensure that sites in different parts of the area can come forward in a meaningful manner which balance development viability, efficient use of land and have a realistic chance of delivering sustainable development.

Comment

Representation ID: 14274

Received: 13/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer Planning

It is also welcome to see that subject to viability, the level of affordable provision on sites can
be reviewed which is of particular relevance on sites which are previously developed land.

Comment

Representation ID: 14276

Received: 13/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer Planning

We are concerned as to how the Council will judge what is or what is not “an excessive concentration of student accommodation” as outlined in Policy H3(d). Supporting
text in paragraph 8.21 details that the Council consider there are sufficient bedspaces available to meet identified need to 2028 but as that will be around or shortly after the Local Plan is adopted, we question how needs will be judged post 2028. Further clarity is required as to how this will be implemented so that landowners can consider opportunities on sites such as Hythe Quay.

Comment

Representation ID: 14277

Received: 13/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer Planning

Although the principal of supporting sites which are currently in employment use and seeking
to retain these across Colchester, the policy as written raises questions on internal conflict and the Council will need to consider how policies operate in conjunction to secure the overall objectives of the plan and deliver sustainable development in Colchester.

Comment

Representation ID: 14278

Received: 13/01/2026

Respondent: Boyer Planning

we are concerned with commitments to achieving the criterion needs to be reasonable to
ensure that aa site is deliverable and achievable. Having the needs be balanced against the
role that different locations across Colchester play and the merits for each. Hythe Quay has been identified by the Council as an area of growth. We acknowledge there
are established transport links including access to the A134, bus routes, and Hythe Train
Station as well as established pathways that link the site to the surrounding facilities. The site
at Hythe Quay is well placed to connect to utilise these transport connections.