Colchester City Council Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation 2025

Comment

Representation ID: 14072

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: The Furze Partnership.

Agent: Ceres Property

Tollgate Partnership strongly support the proposed allocation of land at The Furze, Layer de la Haye, Policy PP39 specifically. Confident that the site can be delivered in a manner which would support the proposed objectives of Policy PP39.

We are in discussion with Essex County Council Highways to understand what improvements could be made to the existing public right of way for all users to in turn discourage reliance on The Folley for pedestrian access, or ultimately private vehicles. It has been agreed that accessing the site via The Folley is safe and feasible for cyclists however

Comment

Representation ID: 14096

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: The Furze Partnership.

Agent: Ceres Property

Our client supports the position of the village (Layer de la Haye) in the settlement hierarchy, which in turn supports the allocation of modest growth proportionate to its sustainability credentials. The growth proposed through the two allocations for the village will ensure that the existing services and facilities continue to be supported and invested in, protecting their long term viability.

Comment

Representation ID: 14097

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: The Furze Partnership.

Agent: Ceres Property

consider the Council's dismissed alternative suggestion to be more appropriate. Building Regulations set out a number of requirements in relation to the sustainability of new buildings and by nature of them comprising national requirements, they are evidently deemed appropriate. It is therefore unreasonable for the Council to propose requirements beyond these without appropriate justification or flexibility.

Comment

Representation ID: 14098

Received: 14/01/2026

Respondent: The Furze Partnership.

Agent: Ceres Property

Whilst the viability of this policy on the Local Plan as a whole may have been tested, it is highly unlikely that the provision of affordable homes on a site of this scale (PP39) would be viable and thus this policy could significantly hinder the delivery of small sites in rural areas, regardless of their tenure. As smaller sites are sometimes the most appropriate in such areas, therefore is a serious risk of stagnation in these areas as a result of this policy.