I am commenting on Policy PP23 because West Mersea cannot support further large‑scale development. The B1025 already operates over capacity, and The Strood’s tidal closure restricts safe, reliable access for residents and emergency services. Healthcare provision is stretched, and wastewater infrastructure is at or near capacity. Mersea is surrounded by nationally protected designations (SSSI, SPA, SAC, Ramsar, MCZ) which require stronger safeguards. Policies ST1, ST2, ST7, EN1 and LC1 must be applied more robustly. Development at Dawes Lane is not sustainable without addressing these constraints.

I am commenting on Policy PP23 because West Mersea cannot support further large‑scale development. The B1025 already operates over capacity, and The Strood’s tidal closure restricts safe, reliable access for residents and emergency services. Healthcare provision is stretched, and wastewater infrastructure is at or near capacity. Mersea is surrounded by nationally protected designations (SSSI, SPA, SAC, Ramsar, MCZ) which require stronger safeguards. Policies ST1, ST2, ST7, EN1 and LC1 must be applied more robustly. Development at Dawes Lane is not sustainable without addressing these constraints.

"12.23 West Mersea is a coastal town located on the confluence of the Colne and Blackwater Estuaries, approximately 15km from Colchester city centre. There are frequent bus routes serving the town to and from Colchester and serving the local secondary schools."
West Mersea is a town ON AN ISLAND, with added charm of high tides cutting off the main road to Colchester on a regular basis - new residents must learn about Tide Tables. There are frequent buses, but they pause the service at high tide. West Mersea has no secondary school, which needs to be more clearly stated.

1. Health provision is inadequate. It is causing house dales to fail. Further expansion will be dangerous and will not have proper cover.
2. Access to island is restricted by tidal road closures. These are getting worse, as partial road closure due to main services repairs and accidents and car braekdowns in flooded roads risk support services accessing the population.
3. Proposed development is rmote from Island facilities-too far to walk, especially for older folk, adding to traffic on poor road infrastructure which will not improve.
4. No secondary educarional provision, so more traffic off isalnd to schools, adding to climate warming and time wasting.
5. The access road to the island from all directions are poorly maintained, narrow, and dangerous.

Mersea island comes with a unique set of challenges the biggest being the Strood, at present if a high tide covers the road during commute times it’s not uncommon for traffic to build up back as far as Langenhoe on the B1025 and Peldon on the B1026 making it virtually impossible for emergency vehicles to get through should there be an incident on the strood, there has been incidents in the past of emergency vehicles being involved in collisions trying to navigate past queuing vehicles.
The water pressure in the summer months can drop considerably due to the demand placed on it by the campsites and frequently we have burst mains on the strood and the junction of the Peldon rose which in turn adds more misery when travelling to and from the island,
The sewage treatment works are no longer fit for purpose and have been run at capacity for some time now,
The doctors surgery is no longer accepting new patients and struggles to serve patients already registered.
Public transport is very hit and miss and at high tide will terminate at Langenhoe.
At present when the island is cut off from the mainland in the summer months we need a second fire crew and pump due to the numbers on the campsites.
We rely heavily on first responders and the air ambulance,
There are few job opportunities on the island.
The school is at capacity and as there is no secondary school.
Dawes lane itself is in a very poor state and in need of widening properly!.
This area is home to Bats owls and slow worms to name a few.
Whilst I understand there is a need for more “Affordable housing” I strongly feel the island can’t cope with another large scale development

The planned expansion of west Mersea of 300 homes is unsustainable, the local doctors surgery has stopped taking new patients, the water and sewage is insufficient, the roadway is already under pressure, not withstanding the tide cuts of the island regularly, making access and egress difficult. The island has a delicate eco system which is already under pressure with significant coastal erosion. During the summer the influx of tourists means that the islands population doubles and there is little parking. Adding some 600 to 1200 more people is not a sustainable option.

West Mersea not suitable for extra 300 houses on top of 200 already granted
* Surgery list already closed, unable to cope with size of premises, no sight of resolution to problem
* Only one road on/off Island which often floods during high tides. Danger to life likely if need to evacuate the Island
* Limited Public Transport often totally suspended by flooding on the Strood
* Waste water treatment issues cause enviromental concerns
* Local infrastructure inadequate to support greater population eg parking
* Government encourages less car use but Mersea location makes this inevitable eg pollution

I am commenting on Policy PP23 because West Mersea cannot support further large‑scale development. The B1025 already operates over capacity, and The Strood’s tidal closure restricts safe, reliable access for residents and emergency services. Healthcare provision is stretched, and wastewater infrastructure is at or near capacity. Mersea is surrounded by nationally protected designations (SSSI, SPA, SAC, Ramsar, MCZ) which require stronger safeguards. Policies ST1, ST2, ST7, EN1 and LC1 must be applied more robustly. Development at Dawes Lane is not sustainable without addressing these constraints.

I am commenting on Policy PP23 because West Mersea cannot support further large‑scale development. The B1025 already operates over capacity, and The Strood’s tidal closure restricts safe, reliable access for residents and emergency services. Healthcare provision is stretched, and wastewater infrastructure is at or near capacity. Mersea is surrounded by nationally protected designations (SSSI, SPA, SAC, Ramsar, MCZ) which require stronger safeguards. Policies ST1, ST2, ST7, EN1 and LC1 must be applied more robustly. Development at Dawes Lane is not sustainable without addressing these constraints.

I am commenting on Policy PP23 because West Mersea cannot support further large‑scale development. The B1025 already operates over capacity, and The Strood’s tidal closure restricts safe, reliable access for residents and emergency services. Healthcare provision is stretched, and wastewater infrastructure is at or near capacity. Mersea is surrounded by nationally protected designations (SSSI, SPA, SAC, Ramsar, MCZ) which require stronger safeguards. Policies ST1, ST2, ST7, EN1 and LC1 must be applied more robustly. Development at Dawes Lane is not sustainable without addressing these constraints.

QUESTION - Are the Government whitewashing building plans – ie serving themselves or serving the public? Are they granting ministers greater oversight of local planning decisions and allowing planners to bypass local committees with reduced local input?
Expanding the Local Plan poses unresolved risks for Mersea Island including environmental issues, health and safety concerns unsuitable for the proposed additional housing.
ISLAND – with a unique island status. We are surrounded by water with only one access road. Due to climate change, it faces growing disruption from rising sea levels, higher tides and increased tidal surges noticeably covering the Strood more often. This puts additional pressure and affecting entering/exiting the island for emergency services, bus services, supply deliveries, residents, etc.
SEWAGE – a recent article in the Courier (14/11/25) said that “the bathing water sampling off West Mersea by the Environmental Agency reported levels of Intestinal Enterocci ….” highest levels recorded - proving that infrastructure is already overwhelmed even prior to the current Dawes Lane development completion. Further development will worsen the situation without major investment for upgrades to eliminate contamination levels.
WATER SUPPLY – water pressure drops especially during peak tourist season. Several recent burst water mains (corner of East Mersea Road and Strood) causing outages for part of the island and creating major disruption due to emergency works required.
BUS SERVICES – disruptions to and from Colchester caused around high tide leaving commuters, school children, pensioners and general passengers stranded.
SUPERMARKETS – Tesco Express and a Co-op, these are invaluable to Islanders. Limited supermarket capacity and increased deliveries cause congestion and parking issues. The Co-op carpark also services the Doctors, Dentist and the school.
DOCTORS – all healthcare access is strained with new residents unable to register locally with poor and no transport links to alternative surgeries.
SCHOOLS – the single school is at full capacity - prior to current Dawes Lane development completion - the new development would be a long walk for primary school children. There is only one pre-school with limited places.
TOURISM – the Island has several static caravan parks, touring caravan parks and holiday parks, this substantially increases population, intensifies pressure on local resources and triples traffic.
EMPLOYMENT – opportunities are limited and not suited to all.
POLICING – there isn’t any and rarely see Community Officers.
EMERGENCY EVACUATION – there isn’t anything in place, has a simulation ever been done!
PROPOSED LAND – the northern part of the allocated area east of Dawes Lane is used for wheat/barley or even rape. The southern allocated area is a green field with no crops and woodland. Why reduce yet more much needed crop fields. While I oppose to additional housing on the Island due to its unique character, if unavoidable, I recommend limiting development to the southern end up to the treeline to preserve the crop field.
In conclusion, WE, THE RESIDENTS, NEED TO BE HEARD AND NOT IGNORED.

Provision of medical services is inadequate to meet current demands as evidenced by the closure of new patient lists by West Mersea Surgery. Occupants of proposed new housing would have to travel off the island for routine and emergency treatment. Travel across the Strood is restricted by high spring tides. There is no safe cycle route to Colchester. The sewage treatment works is already subject to periodic discharges of untreated waste water compromising recreational use of the beaches. Limited employment options on the island will increase commuter traffic and hold ups on the Strood.

I strongly object to the Local Plan allocation of 300 additional houses on West Mersea due to the significant risk to the Blackwater Estuary, which is protected by multiple designations including SAC, MCZ, Ramsar, SSSI, SWPA, and Bathing Water Regulations. The proposal is unlikely to meet strict legal and environmental tests, particularly given concerns from the FSA, Natural England, and Ofwat about sewage capacity. The already overburdened West Mersea Water Recycling Centre cannot support further development, risking water quality, marine life, public health, and the local oyster industry. Also, the local doctors and dentists no longer accept new NHS patients.

I am commenting on Policy PP23 because West Mersea cannot support further large‑scale development. The B1025 is the only route on and off the island, and regular tidal closures at The Strood restrict safe, reliable access for residents, services and emergency responders. Healthcare provision is already stretched, and wastewater infrastructure is at or near capacity. Mersea is surrounded by nationally protected designations (SSSI, SPA, SAC, Ramsar, MCZ) which require stronger safeguards. Policies ST1, ST2, ST7, EN1 and LC1 must be applied more robustly. Development at Dawes Lane is not sustainable without addressing these constraints.

See attached submission.

OBJECTION OBJECTION OBJECTION OBJECTION OBJECTION OJECTION

Having read the proposal I am commenting on PP23 because I strongly object to any further development on this Island.

WE SIMPLY DO NOT HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT MORE HOUSES/PEOPLE

The local doctor and dentist are not taking on any patients and there is no evidence in the proposal for the wellbeing of residents and there is no confirmation of increased capacity for the aforesaid.

The school is small and I believe full to capacity - so presuming families will want to buy these new house where are the children going to attend school/ the doctors and the dentist?

Another factor which also concerns me is the access on and off of the island - there is just one road which gets flooded regularly - where is the tidal access plan?

1. INTRODUCTION
West Mersea Town Council strongly objects to the proposal in Draft Local Plan to put 300 dwellings at West Mersea because the Draft Local Plan does not recognise that Mersea is an Island with restricted access due to it’s single tidal road with poor public transport. Also the limited room for 1
expansion for future generations (NPPF), with the whole Island lying within the Coastal Protection Belt and some seven other conservation areas.
Mersea Island, Water Quality, and Biodiversity Constraints
Mersea Island is an ecologically sensitive and legally protected tidal island at the confluence of the Blackwater and Colne estuaries, connected to the mainland only by the tidal causeway, The Strood. It supports internationally important estuarine habitats, including saltmarshes, mudflats, and shingle beaches, and is covered by multiple environmental designations, including a Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ). The island is also renowned for its native oyster fishery, a key part of the local economy, tourism, and cultural heritage.
A recent river survey undertaken by Anglian Water and commissioned by the Environment Agency highlighted the high frequency and volume of discharges from the West Mersea Water Recycling Centre (WRC). The survey identified a long-term deterioration in water quality. Despite upgrades, 2025 bathing waters recorded the highest bacterial spike on record, with human sewage identified as the source, demonstrating ongoing risks to sensitive marine habitats.
Native oysters and other Priority/irreplaceable habitats are recognised as highly threatened globally. Restoration efforts through the Essex Native Oyster Restoration Initiative are underway. The Food Standards Agency has confirmed that further housing on Mersea Island will have a measurable effect on water quality and protected oyster beds, increasing nutrient and bacterial loading. Natural England (Feb 2023) has requested evidence that additional development will not harm designated marine sites. The Plan, however, does not reference the MCZ, nor does it assess cumulative wastewater impacts from existing or proposed development.
The original Dawes Lane and Brierley allocations were approved without any consideration of the MCZ, despite functional links to sensitive habitats, and the Plan now proposes an additional 300 dwellings at Dawes Lane, raising the total development pressure on West Mersea to approximately 600 homes. The Sustainability Appraisal fails to assess these allocations in combination, contrary to SEA and Habitats Regulations, and ignores potential significant harm to the MCZ, SPA, Ramsar site, SAC, and Priority/irreplaceable habitats.
Critical other constraints and infrastructure issues are also omitted: transport impacts have not been adequately considered, and healthcare provision is insufficient, with nearly one full-time doctor per 2,800 patients and closed patient lists. While building extensions for medical staff are proposed, there is no evidence of increasing the number of doctors to meet demand.
Accordingly, the Plan raises serious concerns regarding compliance with Policies EN1, EN3, ST7, NZ3, CS5, CS6, LC1/LC3, and site-specific allocations including PP23 (West Mersea), particularly in relation to cumulative environmental impacts, MCZ protection, and potential significant harm to Priority and irreplaceable habitats.
Crossing onto Mersea Island just as the tide meets in the middle of the roadway B1025
Photo by Chrissie Westgate
3
A big Spring Tide at the bottom of The Lane - Coast Road West Mersea
A moderately High Tide situation at the Strood
Red area indicates areas flooded to the 5m Ordnance Datum Level this would be equivalent to about 7.2 m surge high tide which overtops the seawalls, Lidar maps later showing the slump of seawalls
5

Should this development proceed we make the comments below
In addition to the infrastructure and mitigation requirements identified in Policy ST 7 and subject to compliance with all other relevant policies, development will be supported on land within the area identified on the policies map which provides:
1.
Approximately 300 new dwellings of a mix and type of housing to meet evidenced needs and which is compatible with surrounding development;
2.
Safe and suitable site access to required highway design standards and a singular point of vehicular access to be agreed with the Highway Authority which demonstrates that the proposal would not be detrimental to highway capacity or safety;
3.
A safe pedestrian access to ensure connectivity within and throughout the site to existing footways and any Public Rights of Way. Ensure provision of green infrastructure connections and recreational access to the countryside, and The Glebe, also securing active travel links and connections to the settlement, including to the district centre;
Footways from the site down to East Road must be upgrade for safe access. Also any pedestrian access onto East Road from the site will require a new footway to be provided from the site join the existing footway ending opposite the Fox public house.
4.
Screening comprising locally appropriate tree belts and/or hedgerows will be required along the site boundaries to ensure that development is sensitively integrated into the landscape to reflect and reinforce rural character;
5.
Enhanced provision of open space of at least 5 hectares must be provided within the site and this open space must link with the open space within the approved scheme at Dawes Lane and connect through to The Glebe as indicated on the policies map;
NOTE: This development’s open space which should be the north of the developed area and should be left within the CPB designated area so that no further development of site may occur at a later date.
6.
Contributions towards the enhancement of the quality and value of The Glebe Sports Ground and facilities.
Yet to be agreed with WMTC and further considerations for Section 106 monies will be required by WMTC.
7.
Provision of allotments to be transferred to West Mersea Town Council to manage and maintain
8.
Native hedgerows and grassland within the site should be retained and enhanced with any loss of grassland compensated within the site. BNG measures should include enhancing retained grassland, establishing new grassland and native hedges, and new tree planting;
9.
Support will be given to delivering standing freshwater habitat within or adjacent to the site to support the delivery of the strategic creation opportunities in the Essex LNRS;
10.
Development must conserve, and where appropriate, enhance the significance of heritage assets (including any contribution made by their settings). Designated heritage assets close to the allocated site includes six Grade II Listed Buildings and one Scheduled Monument as informed by the stage 1 HIA;
11.
Demonstrate adequate capacity for managing wastewater including proposed phasing requirements or alternative solutions to the satisfaction of the Council and Anglian Water;
Cumulative Infrastructure Concerns:
i) The allocation for ~300 new dwellings must be considered in combination with existing Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plan housing (~280 dwellings).
ii) Cumulative wastewater discharges from all these dwellings, along with any caravan parks or other developments, risk exceeding WRC capacity and contributing to CSO events.
Environmental Impacts:
i) The site drains into sensitive estuarine and coastal habitats, including MCZ (native oyster beds, intertidal sediments) and SAC.
ii) Without mitigation, nutrient, bacterial, or chemical loading fromdevelopment would threaten recovery of protected features and compromise bathing water quality, impacting both biodiversity and recreation.
Economic and Tourism Implications:
i) West Mersea relies on aquaculture, oyster tourism, and coastal recreation.
ii) Pollution from additional dwellings could degrade water quality, undermine oyster recovery, and reduce tourist visitation, creating direct economic harm.
Policy Compliance:
To meet PP23, ST7, and other relevant policies (LC1, LC3, EN3,ST2/ST3, NZ3, CS5, CS6), the following are required:
1. Full cumulative assessment of wastewater impacts including WRC and CSO contributions.
2. Confirmation of WRC capacity before occupation.
3. Mitigation measures to prevent adverse effects on MCZ/SAC features, oyster beds, bathing waters, and tourism assets.
Conclusion:
Development cannot proceed without addressing cumulative wastewater capacity and environmental impacts. Failure to do so would undermine the soundness of the Local Plan and jeopardise both ecological recovery and the local economy.
12.
A range of measures in addition to prioritising SuDs (Policy EN8) and water efficiency measures to reduce the risk on impact on the WRC capacity as a result of planned growth including:
i.
Removal of unrequired network flows;
ii.
Targeted education to include new residents of the development;
Rather than targeted education for water usage it would be better that water saving measures are employed within the construction of the development, such as dual flushing toilets, and no power showers and all dwellings to have metered water supply. These will also help in iii) below.
45
iii.
Reduction in the demand for potable water.
13.
Any site specific infrastructure requirements from the IDP (likely to include education provision, highway mitigation, water and wastewater and specific community / open space provision).
14.
Before granting planning consent, wintering bird surveys will be undertaken at the appropriate time of year to identify any offsite functional habitat. In the unlikely event that significant numbers are identified, development must firstly avoid impacts. Where this is not possible, development must be phased to deliver habitat creation and management either on or off-site to mitigate any significant impacts. Any such habitat must be provided and fully functional before any development takes place which would affect significant numbers of SPA birds.
All development Proposals within West Mersea Parish, will also be determined against the policies in the West Mersea Neighbourhood Plan (adopted October 2019) Neighbourhood Plan where they are up to date and relevant.
However the new Local Plan drives a cart and horse through the adopted Neighbourhood plan which was signed off in 2022 and runs till 2033. This whole area was in the Coastal Protection Belt.!! Therefore there seems to be little point in producing a Neighbourhood plan if a new Local Plan is produced every 5 years which can then override its provisions by demanding more housing development than was in the WMNP and outside the development area of the Parish in CPB land.
Policy CS1 states in a) An alternative, equivalent community facility to meet local needs is, or will be, provided in an equally or more accessible location within a minimum walking distance of the locality (800m or the minimum distance based on that appropriate for the facility being provided as set out in the relevant evidence
The Primary school is 2.1 Km
The secondary school in Colchester TLA is 9.5Km however the other secondary school used is at
Tiptree called Thurstable which is some 13.2Km distance.
The GP practice/ Medical Centre with Dentist is 2.06 Km
Distance to village centre is 2.51Km
These distances do flag up that this site is very distant from important services and well over the recommended 800 metres, also see below about the difficulties with public transport.
States “frequent bus routes” (Sustainability Consultation (feb 2025 separate document)
How can this be correct when there is predictable and unpredictable blockages to the only access road B1025 onto the Island because of high tides which impedes the bus route. (see in infrastructure details). If the bus can not get onto the Island there will be no service within the Island, and this could mean no buses for several hours.
Infrastructure requirements to 2041 3.9.3.
The PPOSS describes range of stated ambitions and proposals for expansion or refurbishment of existing facilities, as well as installation of new playing pitches, at the following locations:
 The Glebe (West Mersea): potential site for installation of new 3G pitch;
However WMTC has it concerns of ongoing maintenance cost for looking after any such installation falling upon the Parish Rate.

You must think of the consequences of your plan. 1. The only road onto Mersea Island is covered by the tide sometimes twice a day the frequency of which is only going to increase. 2. The doctors has stopped taking on new patients meaning new residence now have to travel off the island to see a doctor(see point 1) 3. There is no secondary school on Mersea Island meaning children have to travel off island to attend secondary schooling and are very often left stranded on the Strood if there is a high tide (see point 1). 4. Amenities are at bursting point i.e waste water, (sewage discharge into sea) primary school provision, doctors etc.5. Public Transport (Buses) often do not turn up on Mersea Island or don't leave Colchester to get to Mersea Island leaving people stranded. Sometimes they only go as far as Peldon leaving passengers there. (see point 1) 6. Availability of emergency services (see point 1)
This plan seems to have been made purely for the benefit of developers profit and has nothing to do with the wellbeing of the local population. There are better sites available just off the island which would give the opportunity to travel to Mersea Island or Colchester without the incumbrance of the tide, but perhaps without the profit margin for land owner and developer. This proposal seems to contradict all your policy criteria which leaves the question as to why all the above points have not been considered and the proposal rejected.

Mersea Island should be considered a recreation area first and a large settlement second. The population of the island swells to a huge degree in the summer months as people from Colchester and wider Essex come to enjoy the sea, beaches and countryside. To keep on trying to expand the island's housing stock is nothing short of insanity when it is such a recreational gem. Would you fill Dartmoor with houses because Plymouth is getting full? Preserve and treasure what you have, don't destroy it.

Infrastructure must be put in place before any more new housing development on Mersea Island which should include a new or larger G.P. surgery so that residents can use it and not need to leave the island to see a G.P. Wastewater treatment issues and failures previously, has affected shellfish and bathing waters; an environmental impact assessment must be carried out. The roads need to be upgraded and the speed limit reduced.

Unless the infrastructure for the island is updated (GP surgery, school etc) then the building of additional houses should cease.

MerseaIsland is not suitable for further development of the size proposed for the following reasons: there is only one school, one doctors surgery and one dentist, all of which are already oversubscribed. There is only one way on and off the island and during high tides the road is impassable. Further commuters will only make the traffic delays worse. The island is unique , with special environmental issues, which will be adversely affected by further development. There are other more suitable places for development where there is better access to public transport and the infrastructure is in place.

Further development in West Mersea is wholly inappropriate considering the unique nature of the town, its surroundings, the island upon which it sits and local infrastructure limitations.
1 - There is one road to and from Mersea Island - no other options. Traffic issues are already caused when tides cover the road or when there are roadworks and traffic increases significantly during the summer period with holidaymakers and day visitors. Additional development will exacerbate the existing challenges in this area. When tides cover the road then buses will terminate off island so travel by car really is the only feasible option.
2 - There is only one GPs surgery on Mersea and they have not been accepting new patients for some years now. Attempts to develop a new surgery have proven fruitless over the past years even though initial provision was put in place as part of previous agreed planning for further dwellings. As such, new residents will need to register with surgeries elsewhere. It is not clear if there is capacity elsewhere and regardless, this will increase the number of car journeys to GPs in other towns thus adding to the increase in travel related issues above.
3 - Need also to consider the already challenged parking situation in West Mersea as new residents would need to drive to the central commercial areas. Already there are parking challenges in the High Street in the evenings and at weekends and there is zero capacity for any other options.
4 - Mersea has a unique fishing heritage and continuing industry that relies on maintaining the quality of the surrounding waters. It is absolutely key that this is protected along with the various sites of scientific interest and marine conservation zones. If is far from clear how the sewage requirements of this number of additional dwellings would be managed in order to protect the above as required.
5 - Similar concerns existing in regard to bathing in the sea and other personal watersports such as paddle boarding, kite surfing etc. Maintaining a suitable level of water quality is key for these activities as well as for the fishing industry above
6 - the increase in traffic along Dawes Lane is already apparent since the already approved dwellings have been built - particularly at the southern end. With the street parking that is required for the old houses in that area, further development will only increase the challenges
7 - the local primary school has a policy of accepting any child that is resident on the island, but surely there must come a point when they do not have the infrastructure and resources to be able to do this as numbers increase. Has this been considered at all?

Mersea Island is already overdeveloped and does not have the infrastructure to sustain further development. There is only one school, one doctors surgery and one dentist, which are no longer taking on new patients. Another 300 houses just cannot be sustained. There are more suitable areas for development where the infrastructure is already in place and there is greater access to public transport. There is only one road on to the island, already congested at high tide, further development will make the traffic flow worse.

The proposed uses of planning gain funds do not provide additional infrastructure to offset the impact of the development and have not been supported by a public consultation ie adequate sports facilities and allotments are already available. In a recent poll by a local newspaper only 2 % of respondents supported either project,

The impact of increase in and existing several thousand static units at holiday parks, the allowed increase in occupancy periods of the holiday parks and of touring caravans and camper vans and of beach huts and day visitors has not been assessed eg as to its impact on residential amenity and infrastructure of West Mersea.

The impact of a each static unit with 10 to 12 month occupancy which may include its subletting is equivalent to a Band A property in respect of impact and should be included in a over-all assessment of developments .

The town envelope has already been extended to include two area of farm land ie 100 homes south of East Road and 100 homes west of Dawes Lane, This proposal further extends the town envelope by use of farm land for 300 homes east of Dawes Lane. This proposal is detrimental to the character of West Mersea from that of semi-rural to urban. The use of further productive farm land ie a green field site should not be used when other brown field sites exit with the Colchester area. I can also not accept that part (only) of the extensive site of the former Middlewick Firing Ranges cannot be developed without detriment to its ecosystem

The site at Bradwell is designated by the UK Government for another nuclear power station which is a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project. The recently revised Sizewell B Offsite Emergency Plan is stated by the Office of the Nuclear Regulator as that to apply to any new plants. That would require the evacuation of Mersea which may be obstructed by tidal states. This should be assessed in respect of these proposals as actions by the Local Planning Authority should not obstruct a NSIP proposed by Central Government

All amenity open space within the development should be registered as a Village Green to provide ongoing protection from later development. This should be maintained by the development not by the Council

Another large development in West Mersea is wholly inappropriate considering the unique nature of the town, its surroundings, the island upon which it sits and local infrastructure limitations.
1 - There is one road to and from Mersea Island - no other options. Traffic issues are already caused when tides cover the road or when there are roadworks and traffic increases significantly during the summer period with holidaymakers and day visitors. Additional development will exacerbate the existing challenges in this area. When tides cover the road then buses will terminate off island so travel by car really is the only feasible option.
Should Mersea need to be evacuated it will already take hours, with all residents, visitors and workers crossing The Strood on foot or by vehicle, adding easily another 300+ cars to that would increase the time to safety for so many people.
2 - There is only one GPs surgery on Mersea and they have not been accepting new patients for some time. Attempts to develop a new surgery have proven fruitless over the past years even though initial provision was put in place as part of previous agreed planning for further dwellings. As such, new residents will need to register with surgeries elsewhere. It is not clear if there is capacity elsewhere and regardless, this will increase the number of car journeys to GPs in other towns thus adding to the increase in travel related issues above.
3 - Need also to consider the already challenged parking situation in West Mersea as new residents would need to drive to the central commercial areas. Already there are parking challenges in the High Street in the evenings and at weekends and there is zero capacity for any other options.
4 - Mersea has a unique fishing heritage and continuing industry that relies on maintaining the quality of the surrounding waters. It is absolutely key that this is protected along with the various sites of scientific interest and marine conservation zones. It is far from clear how the sewage requirements of this number of additional dwellings would be managed in order to protect the above as required.
5 - Similar concerns exist in regard to bathing in the sea and other personal watersports such as paddle boarding, kite surfing etc. Maintaining a suitable level of water quality is key for these activities as well as for the fishing industry.
6 - the increase in traffic along Dawes Lane is already apparent since the already approved dwellings have been built - particularly at the southern end. With the street parking that is required for the older houses in that area, further development will only increase the challenges.
7 - the local primary school has a policy of accepting any child that is resident on the island, but surely there must come a point when they do not have the infrastructure and resources to be able to do this as numbers increase. Has this been considered at all?
8 - Mersea is a unique island, local residents have great pride in it and the community come together to support local causes and ambitions. There is a great deal of voluntary work completed in our community. If pride in the area is decreased because residents feel they've not been listened to and the lovely area we all know increases hugely, civic pride and cooperation will decrease. That will have social and medical consequences in the community which will in time affect tourism and ultimately CCC finances.

Mersea's fragile infrastructure should not be considered for a large settlement.
.
Sewage and pollution from new houses. Current sewage disposal facilities inadequate.

Fishing, oystering and leisure industry are important to the local economy.

Tap water pressure drops during the summer. Further large developments on the Island would exacerbate this problem.

Only ONE doctors is on the island which is FULL

Only ONE dentist. No NHS only private.

School – Has your assessor contacted the school re further influx of new pupils?

Roads on Mersea are busy and could increase by 600 cars from the development.

I attach a paper setting out my comments on the above Consultation and explaining why I object to the proposal that West Mersea should have additional dwellings allocated to it as set out in the Consultation document.

COMMENTS on COLCHESTER City Council's Regulation 18 Consultation for : Proposed new housing for West Mersea - Preferred options Local Plan 2025

SUMMARY

West Mersea's Island location makes it wholly unlike any other community In the Colchester Council area It Is totally unsultable for the proposed development of a further 300 houses because : There Is only one access road which can be Impassable, sometimes for hours, twice a day for 210 days a year because of tidal flooding ; the Infrastructure Is currently over capacity, particularly that relating to education, health and waste water, and parts of the Island are highly environmentally sensitive with relevant protection designations.

GENERAL:

Apparently Colchester City Council considers that West Mersea is a large settlement In the hierarchy of towns and villages and therefore sultable for sustainable development. The proposal Is for an additional 300 houses In addition to the 200 which are already planned. If Implemented the increase of 300 houses would overwhelm the whole Infrastructure of the Island.

No evidence Is provided to justify what, In the unique case of West Mersea, makes It 'large' In this context or that It is suitable for sustainable development Just because a place has a certain number of houses or a certain size of population CAN NOT of Itself make it suitable for sustainable development.West Mersea ( village ) is DIFFERENT to all other settlements In the Council area. It is on an Island ( and its name Is regarded as synonymous with the Island Itself ) . There is only one way on or off i.e. The Strood This is sometimes impassable No other place in the Council's area is even remotely similar.

The points below make it plain that West Mersea is not suitable for further development of the size proposed. However, a small scale development of starter homes and affordable housing for the existing Island population might be appropriate.

HOLIDAY MAKERS

In respect of any Issue, regard has to be had for the immense Increase in the population particularly during the summer because of hollday makers filling up the caravan sites and campsites

TRAFFIC :

The Strood is the only road on / off the Island It Is subject to tidal flooding which can Impact traffic for more than 210 days in the year ( see tide timetables ) . Indeed, on some of the higher tides the Strood can be impassable for more than 4 hours (2 hours elther side of high tide ) To this must be added time for any queue to subside thus meaning that a particular vehicle may not be able to cross for, say, 4 hours 30 minutes.

These delays will only Increase over the years as rising sea levels will result in even higher tides As a consequence The Strood will be Impassable for more days / longer times and matters would become unmanageable If there was more traffic resulting from any further development.

The flooding of the Strood can halt not only cars and commercial vehicles but also : Public transport, ie BUS to Colchester ( It seems strange to categorise the bus service as "frequent" as it appears to have been reduced by nearly half since Covid). Emergency vehicles, particularly for medical matters (the Air Ambulance may not always be available ).

It Is very odd that no mention Is made of the Issues caused by The Strood because on their own they should be fatal to the proposed Development.

There Is only one publicly owned car park near the library ) close to the major shopping area and this would not withstand additional development especially in the summer when it fills up with visitors.JOBS:

No consideration appears to have been given as to exactly what work residents of the proposed new houses would do .The Strood, being Impassable so often, would distinctly limit a prospective business person's enthuslasm to set up a business of any size on the Island This means many more people would have to go off Island to work - but to where ? Also commuting 'off island' could prove ever more difficult due to the increasing flooding related delays on The Strood.

SCHOOL/SURGERY:

It's plain that a new school ( and more teachers ) and a larger doctors' surgery ( and more doctors - particularly as West Mersea has a higher than normal number of elderly residents ) will be necessary If there Is to be any further major development. The country is littered with examples of Intended new Infrastructure not happening thus It would need to be made mandatory that all new Infrastructure be fully completed and operational prior to the sale of a single dwelling.

ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

The Island Is in an unlque position at the confluence of the environmentally sensitive Colne and Blackwater rivers It also has areas which have special designations eg SSSI, Ramsar and Marine Conservation Status .There would need to be measures to ensure that there are no adverse waste treatment issues whatsoever and that all relevant assessments eg Essex Estuaries Special Area of Conservation, are undertaken and followed by appropriate action.

IF NOT WEST MERSEA - WHERE ?

It Is appreciated that the Council has housing targets it must reach Assuming that the additional 300 houses are not to be bullt on Mersea where should they be located ?

The starting point would be within 1,500 meters of any Railway station - Bures, Chappel and Marks Tey to the extent they were not already zoned or proposed to be zoned for development. Next would be areas with good access to reasonable road networks - Copford , Eight Ash Green and Easthorpe Re Easthorpe , regard must be had to the possibility of a new rallway station between Marks Tey and Kelvedon.Finally the houses should be added to existing LARGE SCALE proposed developments such as West Tey where additional numbers of houses would have a minimal impact

CONCLUSION :

In short for the reasons given West Mersea Is clearly NOT sultable for the proposed development of a further 300 houses though a small development of starter homes and affordable housing for existing local residents might be appropriate

We would like to strongly object to any further building
on Mersea Island. As you can see the information is in the address - we are an island with limited reserves and
therefore just cannot add the numbers of houses/people that you we prosing.
Already in summer with the hundreds of people coming to the campsites it puts all our infrastructure under severe pressure, on the River and therefore the Fisheries are severely polluted from overspill from the sewage works, our water pressure goes night down and affects boilers etc.
Our doctors have already had to close their list to new patients and with the high proportion of elderly have that is a desperate situation In the 18 + years we have lived here the water is over the shood for higher and longer due to climate change and non dredging of the channels if for any reason the island had to be evacuated there would be absolute carnage. The public transport is a joke we have gone from 3 buses an hour to 1 to the city - none to the
station or hospital which means we are all reliant on cars - adding to pollution and the atmosphere. The buses won't cross into the island either side of a high tide for at least 1 to 1/2 hrs - causing many delays. There is a great deal of infill building and these numbers haven't been taken into account at all. most people requiring jobs will have to commute as there is a limited number of jobs available
here so young people are moving away leaving a high proportion of elderly people.

please, please ~ reconsider. Don't ' our destroy on island.

I object to Policy PP23 for Land East of Dawes Lane, West Mersea. The proposed scale of approximately 300 dwellings is disproportionate to the capacity of West Mersea’s constrained road network, drainage infrastructure, and island location. The policy relies heavily on future mitigation, phasing, and studies that are not yet secured or demonstrably deliverable in advance of development. Given existing pressures on wastewater capacity, seasonal congestion, and environmental sensitivity, development should not proceed unless essential infrastructure is fully funded, delivered, and operational first. Without firm guarantees, this allocation risks significant harm to local amenity, environmental assets, and community resilience.