Locals seethe after 8ft fence built to keep youngsters out of estate knocked down

Locals have been left furious after council bosses ordered them to remove an 8ft security fence in their new housing estate.

A neighbor built the crime-fighting barrier – dubbed 'the Great Wall of Colchester' – to combat the scourge of anti-social behavior in the city of Essex.

4

4

Disgruntled residents are now dissatisfied with the fencing to combat crime. built to stop anti-social behavior and drugs must be scrapped.

The wooden gate was built at the entrance to a new development between John Castle Way and Bourne Court in Colchester, Essex, just outside Colchester town centre.

A retrospective planning application was submitted to Colchester Council, which has now been rejected by planning bosses, but on conditions that residents explore alternative options such as CCTV.

Colchester Council's planning committee met on January 25 to discuss the fence issue and has since ordered the massive wall to be taken down within six months.

Before it was discussed by councillors, chairman Mike Lilley jokingly nicknamed the fence the “Great Wall of Colchester”.

But neighbors want the £2,000 fence to remain, claiming it has stopped vandalism and anti-social problems including open drug use.

A young mother told it MailOnline: “The situation just got worse and worse – these people were even sitting in my car and openly using drugs – smoking pipes and stuff.

“We all agreed that a fence was the solution, so we spoke to the officers who manage the site and they used £2,500 to put up the barrier.

“It's been great ever since. The problem stopped literally overnight – and it means we have our beautiful little community back – it's heaven.”

School principal Tim Everett and his wife Jayne, who live in the new development, are disappointed at the lack of action to solve the problems faced by drug users and suppliers.

Tim, a former builder who moved to the area because it was peaceful, said that “everyone who lives here was for the wall.”

Other irritated residents previously reported that “used needles” had been left in the middle of the road and tires had been slashed.

One local resident said they had experienced stones being thrown at their property, bollards being knocked over and having to routinely call the police.

Speak with EssexLivethey said: “Over the years I have suffered £950 worth of damage due to stones being thrown at my property.

'There have been bollards fallen and drug dealers slashing my tires when I told them to leave the area.

“We haven't had any problems since the fence was built. I don't live in fear, my family doesn't live in fear and no one else on the road lives in fear.”

The council committee was told by a planning officer that closing the pedestrian route would lead to “demonstrable harm caused by the loss of an accessible link and route that helps provide and promote active and sustainable modes of transport”.

Nearby resident Jennifer Radford, 77, said: “There was often police activity in that area. One of the problems was there wasn't enough CCTV or street lighting.”

'NIGHTMARE'

City and county councilor Dave Harris, who took up the case for residents, said: “I have had many complaints about anti-social behavior and abuse, as well as damage to cars and property.

“This is a beautiful little estate, but it had become a nightmare for the people who lived here. The path was used by the dealers and their customers and there were many problems associated with it, such as damage to cars, smashed windows and shouting and screaming.

“The manager proposed to install a fence to close the path and the residents were happy with that.

“It was put forward on the advice of the council, but now people there have suddenly been told that it has to be done – and that they will have to find another way to protect themselves.”

Colchester Council initially supported the wall but is now insisting it must come down.

A council spokesperson said: “We would ask for the applicant's cooperation in removing the fencing following the Planning Committee's decision to refuse the application.

“If they don't appeal, or if their appeal is subsequently rejected, and they failure In order to cooperate in removing the fencing within a reasonable timeframe, we will be forced to use statutory enforcement powers.”

However, a spokesperson for Boydens, the Colchester agents who manage the estate, said: “We sought and received written confirmation from Colchester Borough Council's Principal Planning Officer that permission would not be required to erect the fence and therefore carried this out for our customers.” instruction.”

4