PLANNING experts have advised Colchester Council to withdraw one of its reasons for refusing Alumno’s student flats development...or risk losing a planning appeal.

Nicky Parsons, executive director of planning at Pegasus Group, has advised the authority it will be unable to justify throwing out the application on the grounds of a lack of consultation.

Ms Parsons is one of a team of three from the firm who will help the council defend its decision to reject the developer’s plans for 336 students flats, an 87-bed Travelodge, retail units and public space in the town’s so-called Cultural Quarter, off Queen Street.

In a letter to the council she said it was “unreasonable” for the planning committee to refuse the application on the grounds of a lack of engagement with the community.

She said: “Officers have confirmed pre-application discussions had taken place and these included the ward councillors and the community.

“Furthermore, officers have confirmed this exercise complied with the council’s own adopted Statement of Community Involvement.

“Therefore, it is not possible to defend the first reason for refusal and any attempt to do so will undermine my credibility as a witness, which could taint the remainder of my evidence and potentially undermine the entire case.”

Ms Parsons has advised the council to withdraw the reason from its case before the six day planning inquiry kicks off in October.

She said: “Should the council disagree with my advice and decide to pursue this matter I will be forced to concede it is unreasonable when cross-examined on the issue by the appellant’s barrister.”

If the reason is withdrawn, the council will have to defend its position on the other listed grounds of disabled access, overdevelopment and design issues.

Earlier this month Alumno submitted revised designs for the southern access point, from Priory Street, to make it more disabled friendly adding a lift for wheelchair users.

Colchester Council’s planning committee will next week decide whether to withdraw the reason and continue the appeal on the grounds of poor design and access.