350-home development is not wanted, say Stanway residents

Gazette: 350-home development is not wanted, say Stanway residents 350-home development is not wanted, say Stanway residents

Sceptical residents say Stanway’s congested roads will not cope with a 358-home development.

Persimmon Homes has held a public consultation on its plans for a housing estate, off London Road.

Residents are concerned about the impact on the roads and a shortfall in school places and healthcare provision.

Angela Armstrong-Coster, of London Road, said: “The homes are not wanted here. I have spoken to a lot of people about this and not one person will welcome it.

“The infrastructure here is stretched and hugely overworked.”

Full story in today's Gazette

Comments (20)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:07pm Wed 16 Jul 14

stevedawson says...

Can't see how that site will impact in anway on the roads in stanway.ifact that site is better than the old sand workings that are currently expanding.
Can't see how that site will impact in anway on the roads in stanway.ifact that site is better than the old sand workings that are currently expanding. stevedawson
  • Score: 11

1:23pm Wed 16 Jul 14

SAndrewss says...

stevedawson wrote:
Can't see how that site will impact in anway on the roads in stanway.ifact that site is better than the old sand workings that are currently expanding.
When would local residents, anywhere, ever want more houses built near them?
I bet the people who will want to live in the houses won't be complaining.
[quote][p][bold]stevedawson[/bold] wrote: Can't see how that site will impact in anway on the roads in stanway.ifact that site is better than the old sand workings that are currently expanding.[/p][/quote]When would local residents, anywhere, ever want more houses built near them? I bet the people who will want to live in the houses won't be complaining. SAndrewss
  • Score: 9

1:35pm Wed 16 Jul 14

1947Babyboomer says...

These issues have been raised many times by ,residents and the parish council (see letter from SPC to ECC, CBC and councillors and MP ). CBC, Councillors,MP and Essex County Council take no notice, at best a trIte and negative response but normally deathly silence. Only when it all grinds to a halt with they then start to look at the issues, but of course it won't be their fault it will be everyone else's. What about the rest of the infrastructure, schools, doctors, public transport and all other services.
Suggest Stanway councillors ( CBC and ECC ) get off their proverbial and stand up for the residents.
These issues have been raised many times by ,residents and the parish council (see letter from SPC to ECC, CBC and councillors and MP ). CBC, Councillors,MP and Essex County Council take no notice, at best a trIte and negative response but normally deathly silence. Only when it all grinds to a halt with they then start to look at the issues, but of course it won't be their fault it will be everyone else's. What about the rest of the infrastructure, schools, doctors, public transport and all other services. Suggest Stanway councillors ( CBC and ECC ) get off their proverbial and stand up for the residents. 1947Babyboomer
  • Score: -7

1:52pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Ontheball says...

I thought this site was meant to a retail park, or something similar, not houses. Mind you, the brown envelope brigade will scupper previous plans in favour of yet more hand outs from central government.
I thought this site was meant to a retail park, or something similar, not houses. Mind you, the brown envelope brigade will scupper previous plans in favour of yet more hand outs from central government. Ontheball
  • Score: 3

1:55pm Wed 16 Jul 14

seikothrill says...

1600 homes in Mile End were not wanted but approval was given despite North Station area having worse infrastructure/ traffic problems than Stanway so I really cannot see the problem with a tiny 350 house development
1600 homes in Mile End were not wanted but approval was given despite North Station area having worse infrastructure/ traffic problems than Stanway so I really cannot see the problem with a tiny 350 house development seikothrill
  • Score: 24

3:45pm Wed 16 Jul 14

karen martham says...

how about they put a second hospital on the site to cater for all the other expansions already going on - when are they going to realise the local nhs is already struggling both in surgeries and in hospitals!!!
how about they put a second hospital on the site to cater for all the other expansions already going on - when are they going to realise the local nhs is already struggling both in surgeries and in hospitals!!! karen martham
  • Score: 8

3:48pm Wed 16 Jul 14

mirokou says...

A12 corridor eventually Stanway Copford and Marks Tey will be one continuous stream of houses. The whole area is brown field… Just start improving the junction at Stanway now..
A12 corridor eventually Stanway Copford and Marks Tey will be one continuous stream of houses. The whole area is brown field… Just start improving the junction at Stanway now.. mirokou
  • Score: 6

3:56pm Wed 16 Jul 14

sam vines says...

You can scream blue murder about any new development in this town and it will be ignored all CBC see is ££££'s from council tax revenue.
You can scream blue murder about any new development in this town and it will be ignored all CBC see is ££££'s from council tax revenue. sam vines
  • Score: 9

4:22pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Pondermatic says...

stevedawson wrote:
Can't see how that site will impact in anway on the roads in stanway.ifact that site is better than the old sand workings that are currently expanding.
It's not just about the roads in Stanway though is it? I'm assuming the potential new residents will be allowed to travel around all roads in Colchester and further afield? More housing just adds to the general congestion in the town, puts more cars on the A12 which can't take the current traffic as it is, adds to pollution, strain on emergency, and municipal services etc etc..... Money is the only reason for these development, and precious little of it gets put back into the town. At least, not in the right places.
[quote][p][bold]stevedawson[/bold] wrote: Can't see how that site will impact in anway on the roads in stanway.ifact that site is better than the old sand workings that are currently expanding.[/p][/quote]It's not just about the roads in Stanway though is it? I'm assuming the potential new residents will be allowed to travel around all roads in Colchester and further afield? More housing just adds to the general congestion in the town, puts more cars on the A12 which can't take the current traffic as it is, adds to pollution, strain on emergency, and municipal services etc etc..... Money is the only reason for these development, and precious little of it gets put back into the town. At least, not in the right places. Pondermatic
  • Score: 5

4:44pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Scoot says...

The problem is that developers seem to be able to get permission to build houses without the powers that be engaging brains as to where the residents will work (i.e they will congest the roads getting to their place of work or getting to Marks Tey Station) and don't kid yourself that the plans for cycle routes etc in the development will be used by the majority. It will have an impact on the local schools even if each house has 1 child that would mean about an average additional 19 children per year group between 0 and 18 years but obviously some years there would be more and some years less perhaps filling an entire class in some years. Then there will be the pressure on having an additional 1000+ patients seeking a Drs surgery or do the developers expect the residents to just pop down to a&e when they have a sore throat ?. Any government in power should legislate (the sooner the better) to ensure that developers can only build on sustainable sites. We hear there is a shortage of houses but unless the developers are forced to build schools and provide other services all we will get is pressure on the infrastructure whilst the developers get fat, send their kids to private schools, find a nice village to live in which has a GP with vacancies and don't really care about anyone but themselves.
The problem is that developers seem to be able to get permission to build houses without the powers that be engaging brains as to where the residents will work (i.e they will congest the roads getting to their place of work or getting to Marks Tey Station) and don't kid yourself that the plans for cycle routes etc in the development will be used by the majority. It will have an impact on the local schools even if each house has 1 child that would mean about an average additional 19 children per year group between 0 and 18 years but obviously some years there would be more and some years less perhaps filling an entire class in some years. Then there will be the pressure on having an additional 1000+ patients seeking a Drs surgery or do the developers expect the residents to just pop down to a&e when they have a sore throat ?. Any government in power should legislate (the sooner the better) to ensure that developers can only build on sustainable sites. We hear there is a shortage of houses but unless the developers are forced to build schools and provide other services all we will get is pressure on the infrastructure whilst the developers get fat, send their kids to private schools, find a nice village to live in which has a GP with vacancies and don't really care about anyone but themselves. Scoot
  • Score: 5

5:39pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Boris says...

seikothrill wrote:
1600 homes in Mile End were not wanted but approval was given despite North Station area having worse infrastructure/ traffic problems than Stanway so I really cannot see the problem with a tiny 350 house development
Absolutely right, the problems at Mile End are far worse than at Stanway. Central government is imposing the building of more houses, so unless there is a change in policy, there are going to be developments like this, and it is idle to expect that they can be stopped just by a few people saying "this is unacceptable".
[quote][p][bold]seikothrill[/bold] wrote: 1600 homes in Mile End were not wanted but approval was given despite North Station area having worse infrastructure/ traffic problems than Stanway so I really cannot see the problem with a tiny 350 house development[/p][/quote]Absolutely right, the problems at Mile End are far worse than at Stanway. Central government is imposing the building of more houses, so unless there is a change in policy, there are going to be developments like this, and it is idle to expect that they can be stopped just by a few people saying "this is unacceptable". Boris
  • Score: 0

7:25pm Wed 16 Jul 14

hughie-s says...

A public consultation as in "this is what we are going to do, if you don't like it tough".
A public consultation as in "this is what we are going to do, if you don't like it tough". hughie-s
  • Score: 7

12:04am Thu 17 Jul 14

greenbroker says...

Pondermatic wrote:
stevedawson wrote:
Can't see how that site will impact in anway on the roads in stanway.ifact that site is better than the old sand workings that are currently expanding.
It's not just about the roads in Stanway though is it? I'm assuming the potential new residents will be allowed to travel around all roads in Colchester and further afield? More housing just adds to the general congestion in the town, puts more cars on the A12 which can't take the current traffic as it is, adds to pollution, strain on emergency, and municipal services etc etc..... Money is the only reason for these development, and precious little of it gets put back into the town. At least, not in the right places.
These houses are 'dumped' in areas where there's going to be less opposition from local residents. A few more houses won't make much difference.......let
's put them there. We already have that silly development alongside the A12 at Marks Tey in the offing as well.
[quote][p][bold]Pondermatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevedawson[/bold] wrote: Can't see how that site will impact in anway on the roads in stanway.ifact that site is better than the old sand workings that are currently expanding.[/p][/quote]It's not just about the roads in Stanway though is it? I'm assuming the potential new residents will be allowed to travel around all roads in Colchester and further afield? More housing just adds to the general congestion in the town, puts more cars on the A12 which can't take the current traffic as it is, adds to pollution, strain on emergency, and municipal services etc etc..... Money is the only reason for these development, and precious little of it gets put back into the town. At least, not in the right places.[/p][/quote]These houses are 'dumped' in areas where there's going to be less opposition from local residents. A few more houses won't make much difference.......let 's put them there. We already have that silly development alongside the A12 at Marks Tey in the offing as well. greenbroker
  • Score: 3

12:05am Thu 17 Jul 14

greenbroker says...

Ontheball wrote:
I thought this site was meant to a retail park, or something similar, not houses. Mind you, the brown envelope brigade will scupper previous plans in favour of yet more hand outs from central government.
A science park. WTF!
[quote][p][bold]Ontheball[/bold] wrote: I thought this site was meant to a retail park, or something similar, not houses. Mind you, the brown envelope brigade will scupper previous plans in favour of yet more hand outs from central government.[/p][/quote]A science park. WTF! greenbroker
  • Score: 0

7:23am Thu 17 Jul 14

PaulRob says...

What an opportunity missed! Clearly what this immediate area needs is a new rail station, with a park and ride facility to get into town. Given this and an improvement to local roads some of the very valid opposition might melt away.
What an opportunity missed! Clearly what this immediate area needs is a new rail station, with a park and ride facility to get into town. Given this and an improvement to local roads some of the very valid opposition might melt away. PaulRob
  • Score: 5

4:25pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Heinz says...

seikothrill wrote:
1600 homes in Mile End were not wanted but approval was given despite North Station area having worse infrastructure/ traffic problems than Stanway so I really cannot see the problem with a tiny 350 house development
Took the words right out of my mouth.
[quote][p][bold]seikothrill[/bold] wrote: 1600 homes in Mile End were not wanted but approval was given despite North Station area having worse infrastructure/ traffic problems than Stanway so I really cannot see the problem with a tiny 350 house development[/p][/quote]Took the words right out of my mouth. Heinz
  • Score: -1

7:43pm Thu 17 Jul 14

ImpossibleMission says...

Yes you lot are right above and we are very lucky, originally it was supposed to be 650, then it changed to 550, then it went to 400 plus, now its 350, big deal so what. Have you seen the roads they have built down here and the infrastructure? By the way we would welcome a hospital the size and quality of the oaks hospital, so that we do not have to use that white elephant, house of death in turner road. If you don't live down here then don't comment please. those of us that have put up with the bombardment and drilling and dust all over our homes in the last 18 months are the only ones with the right to make a remark. By the way no compensation in sight for us either, £250,000, 10 year old houses covered in dust and sand, not even a sorry from The Teflon's.
Yes you lot are right above and we are very lucky, originally it was supposed to be 650, then it changed to 550, then it went to 400 plus, now its 350, big deal so what. Have you seen the roads they have built down here and the infrastructure? By the way we would welcome a hospital the size and quality of the oaks hospital, so that we do not have to use that white elephant, house of death in turner road. If you don't live down here then don't comment please. those of us that have put up with the bombardment and drilling and dust all over our homes in the last 18 months are the only ones with the right to make a remark. By the way no compensation in sight for us either, £250,000, 10 year old houses covered in dust and sand, not even a sorry from The Teflon's. ImpossibleMission
  • Score: 2

2:36pm Fri 18 Jul 14

suzywright says...

The science park was on the site opposite Sainsburys - that was a ruse from the developer just to get the white land allocated. Now its allocated as employment, but will probably end up as a few car dealers/hotel/coffee shop, new B&Q(??)

Hasn't a new road just opened up!? Doesn't that count as new infrastructure? I'm all for it, but then again, I'm for anything being built at Tollgate to get it out of the dumps. The old Sainsburys site is a bloody eye-sore, and the sooner more jobs can be created, then we can have more houses or vice versa. Nice to see things being developed at Tollgate though. I'm sure this will get passed by planners but not without a fat cheque being put towards road widening, cycle lanes etc. Whether the money gets used or not is a different matter - The Garrison houses made a sizeable contribution to signalising the A12 roundabout - when is that ever going to happen?
The science park was on the site opposite Sainsburys - that was a ruse from the developer just to get the white land allocated. Now its allocated as employment, but will probably end up as a few car dealers/hotel/coffee shop, new B&Q(??) Hasn't a new road just opened up!? Doesn't that count as new infrastructure? I'm all for it, but then again, I'm for anything being built at Tollgate to get it out of the dumps. The old Sainsburys site is a bloody eye-sore, and the sooner more jobs can be created, then we can have more houses or vice versa. Nice to see things being developed at Tollgate though. I'm sure this will get passed by planners but not without a fat cheque being put towards road widening, cycle lanes etc. Whether the money gets used or not is a different matter - The Garrison houses made a sizeable contribution to signalising the A12 roundabout - when is that ever going to happen? suzywright
  • Score: 1

7:29pm Fri 18 Jul 14

Assimilation says...

Stanway is small fry. What about the 3 to 4 thousand houses that Tendring wants to build on the farm fields on Clingo Hill and tap into our sevices
Stanway is small fry. What about the 3 to 4 thousand houses that Tendring wants to build on the farm fields on Clingo Hill and tap into our sevices Assimilation
  • Score: 0

3:14pm Fri 25 Jul 14

suzywright says...

Now the travellers have moved in perhaps this is the place for them to go rather than 350 houses! What say you local residents opposing the housing scheme? Which would you prefer, 350 houses and a thriving community or a cavalcade or caravans?
Now the travellers have moved in perhaps this is the place for them to go rather than 350 houses! What say you local residents opposing the housing scheme? Which would you prefer, 350 houses and a thriving community or a cavalcade or caravans? suzywright
  • Score: 0
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree