Councillors David King and Julie Young want to convince residents that garden communities are the way forward to provide for future housing needs (Letters, August 21 “We argue for more sustainable housing”).
What they do not say, however, is that these are not needed in the Local Plan period up to 2033.
The Planning Inspector has already agreed the Objectively Assessed Housing Needs up to 2033.
Without the housing proposed in the garden communities, the Part 2 allocations and various windfall gains are nearly sufficient to meet the required targets.
There is only a need to find sites for an additional 1,000 dwellings for Colchester and 1,000 for Braintree.
Tendring has grown relatively fast via windfall sites and, with the Part 2, allocations, it already has sufficient sites to meet its needs.
The Plan is, however, proposing 7,500 dwellings in the three garden communities for the period up to 2033, which is a massive over-provision of 5,500 dwellings above the Objectively Assessed Housing Needs.
Colchester could easily provide for its shortfall by a relatively small development at Marks Tey which was not given any Part 2 allocation (except for that included in the West Tey Garden Community).
Braintree seems to have a plethora of sites.
It may be that further into the future garden communities will be needed but a decision on these should be deferred rather than committing to over-development now.
Jane Black Old Ferry Road, Wivenhoe
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel