Gladman developments have decided to start consulting the public locally on their aspiration to develop 110 homes on two plots of land off Bakers Lane. Although this site is on the Mile End border in Braiswick it would definitely affect Mile End residents. It is definitely worth feeding back to Gladmans on their housing plan apsirations for Bakers Lane. You can feedback here www.your-views.co.uk/braiswick
If you want an idea of what to write here is what Cllr Martin Goss submitted:
“The land which has been put forward was submitted during the call for sites by Colchester Council under the next version of the Local Plan. The land was not considered suitable for the next Local Plan and therefore the land was not allocated for housing in the Preferred Options. Incidentally I am Chair of the Local Plan so can speak with experience and conviction from being on the Committee since 2008.
As you will be aware proposals should be determined in accordance with the development plan in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 along with the National Policy Planning Framework (NPPF). The site is not allocated in the adopted Local Plan which governs the future development of Colchester. Colchester also has an adequate housing supply for the next 5 years.
Colchester is moving away from piecemeal development which has a cumulative effect on existing communities as a result of increased pressure on infrastructure such as roads, rail, NHS facilties, schools and community centres which your development would not be able to mitigate with the level of housing proposed as section 106 funding would be somewhat limited. To claim that your development could bring major improvements to the local community is both myth and fantasy.
Bakers Lane is already unsuitable for the levels of traffic carried on it daily with it not being a main road on the Essex road network. The road cannot be dualled or upgraded due to the railway line and surrounding public footpaths so the impact cannot be negated when traffic increases by several hundred cars from your proposed development.
Bergholt Road which would be the main route for traffic from this development to traverse North Station is also heavily congested and in the latest developments where 1600 homes are being built between Bergholt Road and Mile End Road no futher traffic access was permitted onto Bergholt Road as Essex County Council already consider this to be at capacity. North Station is also a major area of congestion in Colchester and again would be unsuitable for any further traffic generated by your development.
The listed Lexden dyke also appears to have been dishonestly undersold in your brochure as this area comes with major and merited protection which seems to have been glibly brushed aside with very little mention of the importance of this area.
The only benefit you seem to be trying to sell is some landscaping and a play area. This part of Colchester is already adequately served by play areas with the Bergholt Road play area recently being upgraded at a cost of £80k along with the recently built New Braiswick Park area which is featured on your plan. These play areas already have ample capacity and therefore new ones are not a requirement of the existing local community.
The only people your proposals would aid would be residents of the 110 houses you want to build!
In summary your proposals are premature, desingenuous, inappropriate, opportunist and without foundation or need.
North Colchester is set to take a further 3000 homes over the next 10 to 15 years so any arguments you proposed about housing supply cannot be proven or warranted.
You’ve also overlooked the fact that in 2016 Myland & Braiswick residents overwhelming voted in favour of the Neighbourhood Plan which has now been adopted as part of the Development Plan which carries significant weight in planning terms. Your development fails to identify any need or compliance with the document. Earlier this month the Government issued a Written Statement to Parliament which spells this out clearly. It represents an important policy change and reinforces the role that adopted Neighbourhood Plans, as part of the statutory development plan, can play in decision-making ie that where a planning application conflicts with a neighbourhood plan that has been brought into force, planning permission should not normally be granted.
In summary, there is a gamut of local and planning evidence to see off this proposal.”