Appeal over Stanway 72-bed care home plans is dismissed

Proposals to build a 72-bed care home for the elderly to the west of Stanway Western Bypass were submitted to Colchester Council’s planning department in July last year.

The proposed development site spans almost 12 acres, equivalent to almost seven Premier League football pitches, and includes seven acres of “new public open space” and the diversion of a public footpath.

Colchester Council rejected the plans, sparking an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate in a bid to overturn the decision.

Dismissed - Councillor Lesley thinks it is a good thing the appeal has been dismissed. (Image: Newsquest)

Stanway councillor Lesley Scott-Boutell said: “These plans were out of keeping for the street scene, where you would have the country park and the Lakelands Community Centre, and then a large care home.

“I was concerned about parking and where all the visitors would park.

“I was also worried about overdevelopment for the area, so I believe it is a good thing that these plans have been rejected again.

“Colchester doesn’t reject planning applications unless there are really, really good grounds, so obviously this case stood up with the planning inspector.”

The news of the plans’ rejection will be welcome by residents, who were worried about the impact of the development on the area.

One worried resident said: “As a community, we would have no green space, which is disheartening and does raise issues and concerns, so I strongly object to this.”

Busy - The proposed development site is directly opposite a 225-home development. (Image: Google Maps) Another resident said: “We cannot afford anything else to be put up unless the road layout changes.

“This is ruining it for everyone, ultimately leading to people selling their much-loved homes.”

The planning inspector said the main issues in the case were the location, effect on the character and appearance of the area, and the impact of the proposed development on open space in the area.

The inspector said: “The loss of two hectares of designated public open space and the absence of a contribution to transport and sustainability improvements would conflict with the development plan, and this attracts significant weight against the proposal.”