IT is proposed by landowners and developers that a new town, comprising fifteen thousand houses, should be built at West Tey.

There has been much discussion of the Prime Minister’s requirements for large-scale developments.

He rightly regards green field land as very precious, the need for local support essential and that any development should not be too large.

West Tey fails all these requirements. There has, however, been no discussion of air quality.

The Supreme Court has recently ruled that the UK Government must adhere to rigorous requirements for air quality.

It is estimated that 40,000 people a year die prematurely from poor air quality, a figure larger than those that die prematurely from obesity and alcohol.

It would be virtually impossible to find a site in Essex, which was more unsuitable for air quality than West Tey. If it is built it will suffer from the enlarged A12, the existing A120, with 22,500 traffic movements a day and the proposed A120 as well as 35,000 extra traffic movements a day within the new town.

If by chance the new Colchester Borough Council makes West Tey one of its approved sites, the inspector will surely condemn it on air quality alone.

Giles Coode-Adams OBE DL

Feering

Robert Vestencroft, Gateway 120’s promoter (Letters 29 April), is wrong.

A new town at Marks Tey is not sustainable.  A large-scale dormitory settlement is likely to overload the overcrowded Great Eastern Main Line and cause gridlock on the A120 for many years to come.  Mr Vestencroft refers to only two options for development: new towns or dispersal of homes among villages.

Other more sustainable options include “transport-oriented development”, which ensures that new developments are close to excellent public transport and jobs, compact, and near enough to an urban centre for cycling to become the norm.

Braintree District Council’s planning officers do not consider Gateway 120’s related Temple Border scheme, east of Braintree, “appropriate for development.”  They do not recommend it for a variety of reasons, including lack of certainty surrounding the route of the A120, poor links to the town and impact on traffic.

These reasons also apply to Marks Tey.

Rosie Pearson

Secretary

Campaign Against Urban Sprawl In Essex

IF plans for a new development get the go-ahead at Marks Tey many landowners and developers will make millions of pounds.

The planners must make sure the price they pay for development in Section 106 money makes it a profitable venture for everyone

P Taylor

Colchester