Tendring Colchester Borders Garden Community Development Plan Document (DPD)

Object

Representation ID: 232

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Extremely worrying that DPD fails to mention extreme difficulties there are with the delivery of a link road. WTC do not see how it can still be considered the most appropriate site, or sustainable at all, without the link road and rapid transport system being proven as deliverable.
No confidence link road will be completed. There is no limit specified as to how many dwellings can be built before the completion of a link road. Original HIF grant application set out road network would not be able to sustain more than 1000 new homes without the road.
No guarantee will be delivered in an infrastructure first capacity.

Object

Representation ID: 233

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

DPD does not detail design and delivery of RTS. No evidence that planning consent and funding have been secured.
Not credible to suggest classed as rapid, no evidence quicker or cheaper than using car.
RTS fundamentally flawed as existing roads not big enough for bus lanes and car traffic.
No detail on how traffic priority can be given to the bus.
No link to university campus or local bus routes from Brightlingsea via Wivenhoe to Colchester, new residents travelling from Garden Community would not be able to interchange to local bus network. University students would not finance the RTS.

Object

Representation ID: 235

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Do not understand what being consulted upon if it is subject to change and alternative layout are not available.
Contradictions with Section 1 policy. Reports that were criteria of the DPD that have not been produced.
Large number of Wivenhoe residents have made views clear on development south of A133. Consistently been ignored.
Wivenhoe and Elmstead Strategic Green Gaps said to be protected. Sports and Leisure Park appears in area that should be green buffer for Wivenhoe.
Part D – any options brought forward will destroy any strategic green gap. All land south of A133 must be designated as a country park.
Part F – University now being allocated more area, condition of this shared use needs greater definition and legal status.
Part G – Masterplanning does not include any sound or visual barrier.
Park and Choose Facility need to be resolved now as area requires is not defined.

Object

Representation ID: 236

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Ecology audit bases on desktop surveys and has limitations.
BNG metric fundamentlly flawed.
Restricted access to land for consulting ecologists.
BNG metric measures habit loss as messaure of what is to be replaced. Does not consider way habitat may be degrated or materially changed as a result of development.
Part B – will not prevent additional trips to the coast
Part E – no buffer to East of country park where screening and noise mtigation is more relevant
Part F – No suggestion these facilites go in ether Elmstead or Wivenhoe green buffer.

Object

Representation ID: 237

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Development south of the A133 adjacent to the historic park will lead to harm to park and setting of Wivenhoe.

Object

Representation ID: 239

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

No mention of affordable home provision to include split fo 80% affordable rent and 20% help to buy schemes. It needs to comply with CCC specifc planning document on this matter. No scope for conditions to change to reflect updated evidence.

Object

Representation ID: 240

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Economic and Employment Study concluded that business park with direct access to A120 was a very strong offer whereas the knowledge gateway provision was a more long term opportunity. However, deliverability of link road bring into question as to whether the project can now live up to its one job per household expectation

Object

Representation ID: 241

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Healthcare – no mention of physical delivery of facilities and what these would be. Clarification of catchment of primary health care required. Proposals for a doctor’s surgery at the university has confirmed there will be no access available for Wivenhoe residents, yet Rowhedge will have access to it.
Stewardship strategy will need to interact and work alongside existing local government arrangements including town and parish councils. Country Park is mostly boundary of Wivenhoe, but no residential units contributing to locally superseived management of it.
Local chronic shortage of allotment spaces and cemetery spaces and more importantly school and doctors spaces. Would new residents of GC have claim on any of these if they lived within a parish boundary?

Object

Representation ID: 242

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The traffic modelling acompanying the DPD replies on demonstrably unachievable modal shifts.
Question independence and accuracy of modelling (work completed by Ringway Jacobs who are under direct appointment to ECC)
No plan to mitigate determinetal impact to overzealous emphais on active travel will have on getting other traffic moving.
Little detail on what mitgation measures will be, it is impossibnle to comment on if they will have a postive impact.
A more direct RTS route to a junction opposite the current Knowledge Gateway would be more productive and pedestrain and cycle crossings for A133 should be provided via bridges.
Disappointed not willing to introduce intiatives.
Modal shift predictions can go badly wrong. Looking too far into the future is inadvisable. Figures in DPD (pg 95) not fully explained.

Object

Representation ID: 243

Received: 26/06/2023

Respondent: Wivenhoe Town Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Reduction in local adult rail communting.
Rail companies no apetite to increase number of trains per hour
Local bus services pushed into crisis
DPD policy needs to be bases on realistic and achieable propositions and robust enough it cannot be watered down at planning application
Nothing in evidence to justify RTS will be quicker than travelling by car
Park and Choose new route will not have incentive to attract enough users
Traffic modelling assumes full modal change being achieved. Creates overly optimisic figures. 2033 to 2041 figures need reworking.