THE future of Middlewick was a key topic for debate as candidates took part in a election debate in Colchester.
The land is currently used by the Ministry of Defence, as a training area but the sale from the MOD looks to threaten the future of the wick and become housing.
The site is earmarked for 1,000 homes, despite being an important wildlife habitat.
The land has been included in Colchester Council plans to build nearly 16,000 homes in the city between 2017 and 2033.
During the 16-year period running from 2017 to 2033, Colchester has been set a requirement by the Government of building 14,720 dwellings at an annual rate of approximately 1,043 dwellings per year.
All five candidates agreed that something needs to be done about the plans to build on the site.
Martin Goss - Liberal Democrat
Martin Goss, said: “I think everyone is sick of the Wick being used as a political hot potato.
“The MOD selling the Wick is a struggle which may lead to a rethink but said the issue was also where those houses would go.”
Sara Ruth - Green Party
Sara Ruth said: “I would change the law, so the MOD could not sell the land or change it somehow to get the Wick out of the local plan.
“We do not need to destroy beautiful nature to build houses.”
Pam Cox - Labour Party
Pam Cox said: “I want to see the Wick designated as a local green space or nature reserve and I want to protect that from development.
“The Labour group support the local plan, but the position was that the MoD should stop the sale and stop the build – removing it from the Local Plan does not protect it from development.”
Terence Longstaff - Reform UK
Terence Longstaff said: “We need to look at the stock we have first before putting up huge concrete jungles.
"It would cost more than it is worth to build on the Wick, it is built on unexploded ordinates. “
James Cracknell - Conservative Party
James Cracknell said: “As a new resident to Colchester, it is plainly clear Middlewick Ranges is the last remaining green lung of south Colchester.
“The city council has been over-building year on year for over a decade against Government set housing targets, by up to 30 per cent, without necessary infrastructure to support.”
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 The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.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