Plans put forward to transform an area of Colchester which is in need of an overhaul have split opinion. 

Colchester Council bosses have said publicly the plans give the best chance of a successful development.

But they have also admitted early impressions put forward by Alumno Group and Building Partnerships were not up to standard and more work was needed. 

Here, campaigner and Labour activist Alan Short argues the 'cultural' plans are nothing of the sort.

By Alan Short

After 21 meetings between the developer Alumno and Colchester Council, the start of the development of what the approved Local Plan describes as the “Cultural Quarter” regeneration has begun.

Last Thursday the council planning committee approved the erection of billboards around the site of the old bus station.

These billboards will have the phrase Cultural Quarter on them but the Advertising Standards Authority should consider a fine under the Trades description Act.

Under no circumstances could the high-density development of 330 student bedsits accord with the description of the regeneration in the Local Plan.

The next part of the carefully choreographed plan will include the sale of the land.

This land was covenanted to the town based on it being used for the benefit of the residents of Colchester, though this seems to have been quietly removed in 1995.

The plans to raise the money for the development are being put together by a company incorporated in Singapore.

It will raise the money for the development by selling off the land in individual small parts to investors.

This creation of a myriad of owners has been used before to inhibit future sales or acquisition by local authorities.

The sale of land by the council doesn’t seem such a good plan given the long-term trend of land values: last year’s revaluation of the council assets showed an increase of more than £2 million.

Leasing it for development provides a long term steady income that can be used for council services.

Owning the land also enables the council to borrow against its value for capital programmes.

So, who benefits from the development? There will be rates paid to the council, but this would happen whatever the development.

There will be some 40 jobs created, though these will be mainly for the hotel.

The residents will just get more health affecting pollution, congestion and reduced car parking. The students will just get loans to pay off in the future.

The developers and investors will make significant profits which can be held offshore attracting no UK taxes.

I can’t see how this fits in with the Labour values of “for the many not the few”.

Then there is the issue of risk. I was told that the accommodation was for students at Colchester Institute.

Having spoken to the principal, she says while they mention all suitable accommodation in their prospectus they have little demand now or in the future for residential accommodation.

The story then shifted to Essex University which has 10-year expansion plans; though these have now been delayed for two years because of Brexit. [Ed note: Essex University has denied this is the case].

The university policy is to have accommodation either on or close to the campus.

It is already building some 650 en suite flats on Campus for next year.

If it required further expansion the B&Q site will become available shortly.

Plans are also agreed for the development of 250 student bedsits on the old bus garage in Magdalen Street.

So, who is going to take up the 330 places in the overcrowded Alumno development with its planned ban on car ownership?

What happens if the take up isn’t enough and the place goes bust?

The town will have a “cultural white elephant” on our hands with problems with the land ownership.

I am a Labour Party member and fully support our 11 councillors who do a good job under difficult Tory Government constraints.

The last thing we need is a Tory administration wedded to the sort of outsourcing and council tax cuts that has led to the bankruptcy of Northampton Council.

However, on the Cultural Quarter development our councillors are wrong.

We need to stop the planned development and await or even seek a decent cultural based alternative for the benefit of the town and its visitors.

Alan Short
Oaks Drive, Colchester