Thursday 23rd March, 2023
At a Special Meeting of Colchester City Council on Thursday evening, a joint LibDem and Tory Amendment was passed unanimously on the future of the Tendring Borders Garden Community. It allowed for the Council to put the plans out for public consultation, having noted the concerns in the Amendment.
Wivenhoe LibDem Councillors Michelle Burrows and Mark Cory voted against the Amendment. Their LibDem ward Councillor Andrea Luxford Vaughan abstained, along with Green Councillor Mark Goacher.
Centrist Leader LibDem Councillor Dave King didn’t get in the way of the Third Way approach, allowing the Amendment to his original Motion to be debated without any opposition.
Jane Black of the Wivenhoe Society voiced her concerns, stating that the DPD should be updated, mentioning that there was no mention of partial build-out, and expressed concern over traffic flows that will be affected by cycle crossings.
Sir Bob Russell, High Steward of Colchester, spoke about the threat to Salary Brook, mentioning that even though the threat of an urban mass was eliminated, there was still a recent threat to the expansion of the University.
He hoped for the implementation of a tree belt to thicken the area. He added that he wasn’t a fan of the Garden Community, saying that building houses on prime agriculture land seemed odd.
Wivenhoe Town Councillor and Mayor of Wivenhoe, Tom Kane, raised significant concerns about traffic congestion, safety issues at junctions, unresolved safety issues with the link road, and the cost affecting the development of other facilities.
Amanda O’Connell, Chair of Tendring Borders Community Liaison Group, said that without a Local Plan in place, the alternative would be far worse. If the shortfall is not adopted, the Local Plan will be put back by years, and it will lead to speculative developers having a field day.
Councillor Dave King, moved the Motion and acknowledged that there are concerns around modelling and traffic, stating that they are making sure to be as clear as possible.
The cross-party Amendment was proposed by Tory Councillor William Sunnucks and LibDem Councillor Andrea Luxford Vaughan. Councillor Sunnucks highlighted the importance of the financial appraisal and expressed concern about congestion, noting that a S106 would require £300m from the developer. He suggested that the project be broken down into realistic chunks.
Councillor Luxford Vaughan spoke of the need for infrastructure first and voiced disappointment that the project no longer met the ideal. Councillor King accepted the Amendment, leading to a debate and a vote on the Amendment only.
Conservative Leader Councillor Darius Laws expressed his support. Labour Councillor Julie Young said that this was a significant win for Colchester, providing infrastructure funding of £500m and delivering a secondary school and five primary schools.
Green Councillor March Goacher expressed concern about traffic, and Labour Councillor Catherine Bickersteth emphasised the vision for a 15-minute neighbourhood.
Labour Councillor Chris Pearson pointed out the significant number of affordable homes, while LibDem Councillor Paul Smith voiced concern about traffic and the isolation of parks in his own ward.
Labour Councillor Dave Harris and Labour Councillor Lee Scordis both acknowledged the housing crisis, while Conservative Councillor Dennis Willetts expressed doubts about how to capture the land value and the prospect of massive congestion on Clinghoe Hill.
Labour Councillor Mike Lilley urged the Council to move forward and to contact their MPs if the project failed.
Councillor Luxford Vaughan expressed her concerns, saying that the development is “undeliverable and unsustainable.” She called for a legal S106 agreement to be put in place to ensure that the community has the necessary infrastructure to support it. She also stated that she will not be voting in favour of the proposal.
Labour Councillor Adam Fox, on the other hand, fully supported the proposal and believed that it is a “once in a generation opportunity.” He cited the £500m of infrastructure that would come with the development and the protection it provides for other areas of Colchester.
Labour Councillor Sam McLean argued that the development is necessary since there is little development around Colchester. He stated that bad development leads to problems like North Station and that NIMBYs from 100 years ago still affect the city today.
LibDem Councillor Martin Goss agreed with Councillor Fox and said that the development is necessary to provide infrastructure to the area. He also believes that Garden Communities deliver infrastructure in the right way.
Labour Councillor Jocelyn Law called on Councillors to work strategically, while Labour Councillor Tim Young highlighted the potential benefits of the development, including quality jobs, sustainability, and green spaces. He also believes that there will be new and modern forms of transport in the future to address concerns about the link road.
Labour Councillor Kayleigh Rippingale stated that the development will have a positive impact on the wellbeing of residents by providing opportunities for cycling.
Tory Councillor John Jowers reminded his colleagues of the progress that has been made and the importance of ironing out any problems. He was pleased with the amended motion and called on councillors to stand behind it.
In summing up, Council Leader Councillor Dave King urged Councillors to be positive and constructive and to support the amended Motion. The debate highlighted concerns about the lack of infrastructure and sustainability of the development, but also the potential benefits it could bring to the area.
The Amendment was passed unanimously, with only the two votes against, and two abstentions.
The Chronic has a Patreon page over here if you want to support my work.