It is ironic that as the council is backing the campaign for a “Cultural Town” and for Colchester to be it, council leaders are still backing the flawed plans to destroy the area of the town designated as the Cultural Quarter.

We expect our representatives to have a vision for Colchester and not a plan for controlled decline.

You get better vision from insurance salesmen telling you to prepare for early death.

The revised Alumno plans make no significant change. The things that are wrong with the original proposals still apply.

One change will see the building of a brick wall above the Roman wall giving the residents of Priory Street the ability to compare the Roman edifice with a modern version: the comparison is hideous.

However, this isn’t a violation of the current planning rules.

Objectors have received a letter addressed like junk mail to “the Occupier” posted on December 28.

Past objections become void so I urge all those who wrote in before to revisit the council website and resubmit objections.

The plans are contrary to the Local Plan to create a Cultural Quarter, will increase congestion, unhealthy pollution and parking problems, damage the historic site by pile-driving, infringe the covenant on the land and do little to benefit the local community who haven’t been properly consulted.

The development is speculative with no viability assessment and without any clearly supported demand and from Colchester Institute or Essex University.

The latter’s comments on the recently approved development of student accommodation on Greenstead shows its foresees pastoral and other problems with such independent off campus development.

Using Alumno’s figures for the student “benefit to the town centre” requires students to spend £28 every day here.

Using Painters Yard didn’t work so they are now calling it John Ball Square. I wonder what he would have made of it?

Alan Short

Oaks Drive, Colchester