I would like to object, in the strongest terms, to the new plan Policy PP23, which proposes to allocate an additional 300 new dwellings to the 299+ houses already allocated to the area east of Dawes Lane, West Mersea, in the present local plan (2021-2033).

West Mersea is clearly a special and unique location, surrounded on all sides by water and linked to the mainland only by a single causeway. It is at times inaccessible due to flooding by tide. By definition the Island has only a finite amount of land and infrastructure.

The development Plan claims that it will, “improve the quality of life for our communities, create a better environment and contribute to healthy lifestyles.”

Allowing such large scale development will mean all of the following areas will see a negative impact to environment and quality of life for existing residents of the Island:

Health - The island has limited access to medical facilities, with only one doctor’s surgery and one dental practice. The nearest hospital is over ten miles and an hour’s bus ride away. This inevitably leads to difficulties accessing appointments and demand on emergency services, including the costly Air Ambulance, at times when the Island is inaccessible.

Education - The island already has one of largest and most oversubscribed Primary schools in the Colchester district. The closest Secondary School is around ten miles away. This inevitably leads to increased traffic and limited available places for families.

Electricity - It has not been established whether the existing cabling onto the Island would be robust enough to handle the increase needed.

Gas - The island has a single point of supply presents unique issues of maintaining sufficient pressure.

Water - The Island water supply is delivered through one piping system, which again presents unique issues of maintaining sufficient pressure. There are regular leakages visible on the Strood.

Sewerage - With the swelling of population during the summer months and the increase in torrential rainfall, the current facility simply cannot cope. There is regular contaminated flooding adjacent to the sewage works onto the Bridle Path next to the Seaview Holiday Park. On-going problems in East Road with regular call-outs to clear blockages. Sewage laden flooding regularly occurs at the bottom of Coast Road. As a result, bathing and shellfish water quality are threatened, which will harm key elements of the local economy.

Commerce - The Island has only two ‘supermarkets’, the East of England Co-op, on Kingsland Road and a Tesco convenience Store on Barfield Road. The Co-op car-park has only around 30 parking spaces and the facility is already used by locals visiting the adjacent Dental and Medical practices. The Tesco convenience store only has around 20 parking spaces and already suffers from dangerous congestion during peak times and during deliveries by articulated lorries. Any further development will only increase demand on these limited facilities and drive the need for individual grocery deliveries by van, which will in turn, only lead to further congestion and pollution.

Employment - The Island has limited opportunity for employment and few areas zoned for commercial activity. With limited public transport available, any further development will only increase the number of people needing to commute by car to areas of employment and will in turn, only add to congestion and overload on the already poorly maintained road system.

Leisure - The Island is already inundated with visitors during the summer months. With limited parking available, this inevitably leads to sever problems with congestion. The existing local community centre offers only a limited number of classes and sports activities, is largely staffed by volunteers and is often inaccessible due to traffic. The development offers no new leisure facilities to residents.

Environment - Adding 300 new homes to the already proposed development of 200+ houses will have a huge detrimental environmental effect -

Households owned an average of 1.2 cars in 2024. In rural areas, this rate is higher, with around 61% of households owning two or more cars. For a development in a location where car use is practically essential, this will equate to at least an additional 825 cars on the road. As most of the inhabitants of any proposed new development will need to commute to work, this will lead to a queue of slow moving traffic around 5 kilometres, or 3.1 miles long. If the cars are travelling at an average speed of 40 miles per hour, this line of traffic would extend to 20 miles long.

825 average passenger cars will produce approximately 3,795 metric tonnes of CO2 per year. These vehicles will emit methane, nitrous oxide, and particulate matter, which contribute to global warming and local health issues.

A development of 500 houses would generate around 390 deliveries from grocery vans per week.

A development of 500 houses would typically require approximately 250 to 500 parcel deliveries per day. During peak seasons like Christmas and Black Friday this could increase to 300-700 parcels per day.

A development of 500 houseses will generate 500 tonnes of household waste every year and require its own dedicated waste collection route to facilities in Colchester.

As these proposed houses would be built with both Interim and 2025 "Future Homes Standard”, they could produce anywhere between 180 and 715 metric tonnes of CO2 per year.. However, when you include the "embodied carbon" from construction, the impact for the first year is much higher, at roughly 25,000 metric tonnes.

The consultation document claims that the aims of the plan are to, “Protect and enhance Colchester's special and diverse natural environment.” It is abundantly clear that this proposed increase in housing is completely unsustainable. I firmly request that a complete moratorium is called on any large scale development on the Island, and that a complete and thorough study is carried out on the limits to any future expansion of residential development that will only harm the quality of life for existing residents and cause unrectifiable damage to the historic, cultural and environment value of this unique place.

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.
Plus I am stil unable to register with the doctor here

The island is a conservation area, with a balanced eco system to sustain oyster and seafood fishing. The coastal area is erroding in parts on East Mersea, and the sea level often floods the moorings and road on the Coast road making it impassable.
Bus links are affected by tide times when high. Being an island there is a fine balance of various house vernacular, some within the very dense area of west Mersea and the more rural part of East Mersea, (where facilities and infrastructure are very limited). Two large new build sites are already built and being built (200 homes) This increases the reasonably small population considerably, with no increased facilities.
The Doctor's surgery was full from 2 years ago and since then everyone has been allocated a medical practice outside of the island and a considerable drive away. This will become worse, and their practices will also be too full to take more patients.
There is only one road on and off the island which is congested at peak times, exacerbated when there is high tidal cover of the road for sometimes 2 hours, when it is impassable, further housing and car traffic will worsen this problem.
Limited sewerage and drainage already cause low water pressure and sewer discharge issues into the sea.

West Mersea is an island location, occasionally (up to twice daily) ‘cut off’ from the rest of the county. Recent house building has stretched resources on the island both in terms of infrastructure and other necessities. The GP surgery stopped taking new patients in 2024, there is no NHS dentist available. Water pressure is not always good and further building will only make this worse.

I have just tried to upload the comment below and find по access despite being on the 14th around 16.00. I have established an account using [REDACTED] for your records. As a disabled person I am disappointed with your webpage and its access. I have attempted to contact you by phone for assistance only to find your phone lines close at 15.00. I feel you have erected a barrier to me being able to comment.

Please accept this letter by post

I would like to add my objection to the proposed plan to develop 300 dwellings in the Dawes lane area of West Mersea.

The proposed number of houses will completely overwhelm the already pressured local infrastructure without substantial council and private investment which has always been lacking on Mersea for decades. I am able to look back 70 years+ to what was a dynamic supportive community with spirit, numerous and diverse shops which have been gradually and more recently quickly subsumed into 'another Colchester settlement.

I recall the promised leisure centre, swimming pool and upgrading of the Strood crossing, but years later nothing. So what has Colchester Council done for Mersea promised or otherwise? I really struggle to see much inward investment as is typical in UK coastal communities.

We have the Hard causeway and new toilets, toilets behind the library, the opening of the recycling centre on the old council yard and some lights on the Glebe. The primary school update being decades behind planning. The hoped for new surgery looks to be similar and its worth including that the community fundraised for the exiting buildings.

In essence your planning and infrastructure provision has been all take with little in return.

You have conducted a 'table top' assessment so I wonder if that table is round and the exact same assessment criteria is applied to other communities? Surly, by being coastal 50% of the available land is under the sea making the standard criterla on housing density void? Does the assessment account for the proliferation of 'holiday homes' in the parks which are occupied outside the holiday period or do they not count as dwellings? Do you account for the influx of visitors in the summer? They used to come here in vast numbers for the unique experience Mersea island offered, sadly there is little left now.

Are you aware that Mersea is fed water from Great Horksley reservoir down a single pipe? Anglian Water have already identified Colchester as being under water resource stress not helped by the large developments already in progress. Here in Dawes lane we already have very low water pressure especially at night as the water tower is filled. This suggests capacity to feed the island is already stretched even in the winter.So often coast towns fall behind and become neglected as very visible in Tendering. Early investment and better planning decisions should have taken notice of their unique requirements. This has not occurred and decline can be seen already on Mersea.

Please do not exasperate the decline here with inappropriate planning decisions taken in table top isolation.

The problem of the Strood has been under discussion since the 1930's yet no investment has occurred. Environmentally any adjustments will now be problematic as we recognise the importance of the Spring tide flooding. But a proposal from the the 1970's was to add a single raised track controlled by traffic lights. Long overdue is the resolution of how emergency vehicles gain access during the Spring 2 hour flood period the island experiences. Taking July 2026 as an example 14 days out of the 31 show 'tides likely to cover the Strood' from the printed tide booklet. Potentially, twice a day for 14 days with a duration of 2 hours, or in July which is peak population month the island has 56 hours of no A&E access, Police cover, nor Ambulance. The latter is most important in that time matters e.g. the golden hour scenario, especially with the total lack of GP cover the existing residents currently suffer.

Taking the access situation alone, if Mersea was a green field settlement proposal put to you today it would be refused due to its unique location and limited access. Perhaps even a development restricted zone could be applied?

Does your assessment process take into account the social side of positioning people into an area with already little employment without a long commute into Colchester? Certainly against the Green credentials and 10 minute city direction imposed on you by central gov which you encourage. The road has received по upgrade since the late 1960s when the Colne Valley section was straightened. It is not ideal for the current population with its unfilled pot holes, bends which add character and the lack of signage when flooded creating the dangerous situation of long queues of vehicles waiting to cross around blind bends. You need to do much better for Mersea by supportive planning and forethought.

The local council have already identified the issues, so I support their position.

A summary of my objection is as follows.
West Mersea Town Council has made clear that the scale of development proposed under Policy PP23 is not sustainable.
For the reasons set out in the attached documents, Policy PP23 is unsound as it is not positively prepared, not justified, not effective, and not consistent with national planning policy.
I respectfully request that the proposed allocation east of Dawes Lane is removed, and that future housing provision for West Mersea is reconsidered only following comprehensive infrastructure, environmental, flood risk, and emergency access assessments.
Please see attached document for details and justification.

See Full Submission attachment

Officer summary of full submission. See attachment with detailed comments on numerous policies:
The overall message is one of support for CCC undertaking a review of the adopted Local Plan to ensure an up to date plan prepared in accordance with the NPPF is in place. ECC will continue the on-going engagement with CCC, through the Duty (or any replacement), to assist progress of the Plan to Regulation 19 (the Pre-Submission Plan), particularly with regards the strategic and cross boundary implications, including cumulative issues and opportunities arising from growth to ensure that the infrastructure requirements are identified, quantified, costed and phased where appropriate. ECC service areas have clearly outlined where further collaborative work/assessment needs to be undertaken (e.g. education provision and ongoing transportation modelling) to refine and resolve an issue; and ECC will continue to be engaged, alongside NH, on the proposals which have an impact on the A12 strategic transport corridor, in particular A12 junctions 25 to 28, A12 widening and junction improvements, and the A120 Corridor Maks Tey to Braintree.

There is support for the Draft Plan’s vision which covers environmental, social and economic needs and emphasises healthy living environments and green networks, environmental protection and economic growth. There is support that the mandatory housing target will be met in full and exceeded over the Plan period in accordance with the NPPF, and that future employment needs will be met (noting that some clarifications are sought) by providing a range in scale of additional employment land supply. ECC provides strong support for policies related to net zero carbon (in operation and embodied), water efficiency, health and well-being, and the environment (green and blue infrastructure and BNG. Recommendations are made throughout the response on policy wording (including policy omissions) and justification to strengthen clarity, effectiveness and delivery.

There is strong support for the inclusion of site-specific Place Policies and references to infrastructure requirements, but these will need to be reviewed and confirmed with ECC following this consultation and the agreement of a final spatial strategy by CCC. It is noted there are some omissions in the Draft Plan such as the allocation of a new secondary school. On this issue, ECC acknowledges the requirement is stated in the Infrastructure Assessment Delivery Plan (Stage 3) for site allocation PP18 Land North of A120 Marks Tey; and in the Infrastructure Topic Paper prepared by CCC, where Appendix A lists the infrastructure requirements for the preferred options site allocations (including those for education). Land for the secondary school (and all education requirements) will need to be allocated in the Pre-Submission Plan.

The review of the IDP and full plan viability assessment are key documents for ECC engagement and input following this round of consultation. The Viability Assessment will need to be reviewed following consultation to ensure it can align with the most up to date evidence relating to the EPOA net zero development policies and its viability evidence. Mention is also made in the response to specific localities and sites – notably Marks Tey and Langham – where discussion needs to take place and recommendations are made to ensure effective delivery if these proposed allocations are taken forward to the Pre-Submission Plan.

The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 places a duty on local authorities to reduce crime and
disorder within the community.
2. The National Planning Policy Framework 2024 requires the planning system to be plan
led, with plans contributing to the achievement of sustainable development - being shaped
by early, proportionate and effective engagement between plan makers and infrastructure
providers, to set out the infrastructure contributions expected from development.
3. Essex Police is an essential social infrastructure provider in this respect, who works closely
with neighbourhoods to provide community safety, cohesion and policing in line with the
objectives and priorities set out in the Police & Crime Plan 2024-2028 to support the
creation of safe, strong, healthy, resilient and sustainable new communities.
4. With this in mind, Essex Police submitted evidence to inform the infrastructure scoping
process at the earlier (stakeholder) stages of the local plan review, linked to preparation of
the Colchester Infrastructure Audit & Delivery Plan (IADP) in December 2024 and June
2025, which is retained by the City Council as background documentation.
5. The IADP Stage 3 Report dated 24 October 2025 therefore outlines the Essex Police
infrastructure requirements to mitigate and manage the planned housing/ population
growth over the plan period to 2041.
6. The Essex Policing Model is outlined in the IADP and reproduced below for information.
Essex Policing Model
7. To use resources efficiently to address the incidence of crime and engage effectively with
the local community, Essex Police operates a ‘Local Policing Area’ (LPA) policing model.
8. Each Local Policing Area is resourced by a dedicated Neighbourhood Policing Team (NPT),
consisting of Police Officers, Police Community Support Officers (PCSO’s), Community
Safety Engagement Officers, Children & Young Persons Officers and integrated local
partners and partnerships within co-located Community Safety Hubs.
9. This resourcing structure ensures that an appropriate level of response is coordinated at
the outset, ranging from a routine community safety/ cohesion deployment to a serious
crime response, to meet the community’s needs.
10. Both the construction and occupation phases of residential development lead to an
increase in the incidence of criminal activity . At the construction phase this includes property-based theft and vandalism, as
acknowledged by the Chartered Institute of Building in its publications concerning Crime in
the Construction Industry. Such incidents lead to an increased impact on police facilities
and a greater draw on Essex Police NPT resources.
12. At the occupation phase increased populations give rise to an increase in crime and
incidents against the person (e.g. violence, sexual, burglary, vehicle theft and criminal
damage). New residents would be the victims of such crime, leading to an increased impact
on police facilities and a greater draw on its NPT resources, including specialist unit support
officers.
13. Emerging new communities need to be integrated with existing communities, and an
appropriate level and duration of community safety, cohesion and policing would therefore
need to be provided across the occupation phases of developments.
14. Major new housing developments give rise to significant additional resource needs and
implications for NPT’s, (including specialist officers supporting the NPT’s), requiring
appropriate developer funding in order to mitigate and manage the community safety,
cohesion and policing requirements, including the crime impacts arising.
Police Infrastructure & Facilities (Police Facilities)
15. In the context of the Essex - wide plan making and development management processes,
police facilities are defined as follows;
❖ Additional or enhanced police station (Local Policing Team) floor space & facilities,
including fit out & refurbishment;
❖ Custody facilities;
❖ Mobile police stations;
❖ Communications, including ICT;
❖ Speed Camera/ Automatic Number Plate Recognition Technology;
❖ Police vehicles;
❖ Funding for additional staff resources, incorporating the recruitment, training,
equipping & tasking of Police Community Support Officers (PCSO’s) during the
construction phase of residential development, & recruitment, training equipping of Local Policing Team Officers (LPTO’s) during the occupation phase of
residential development;
16. The developer funded police facilities required to mitigate and manage the impact arising
on Essex Police service capacity (and related costs) are outlined in the IADP.
Local Plan Text & Policy Revisions
17. Essex Police is satisfied that the IADP reflects its budgetary evidence concerning the level
of developer funded police facilities required to mitigate and manage the planned housing/
population growth within the Colchester City Council area to 2041.
18. Essex Police is not currently satisfied, however, that the text and policies within the
Preferred Options Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation are sufficiently justified or
comprehensive, as they are not considered to;
❖ Identify Essex Police as an essential social infrastructure provider – requiring
developer funding in order to mitigate & manage the impacts arising from
planned housing/ population growth;
❖ Essex County Fire & Rescue Service & the East of England Ambulance Service NHS
Trust are also not identified as essential infrastructure providers;
❖ Provide sufficient clarity concerning the requirement for developer funded police
infrastructure/ facilities in association with the strategic housing sites >250
dwellings;
❖ Provide sufficient recognition concerning the definition of ‘infrastructure’ being
applicable to police infrastructure/ facilities (police facilities) – this position is
equally applicable to fire & rescue & ambulance facilities;
❖ Provide adequate recognition to the wider remit & role of Essex Police in providing
community safety, cohesion & policing in contributing to the delivery of sustainable
new communities, in addition to its duties as a Category 1 Responder under the
Civil Contingencies Act 2004 (i.e. its emergency service role) - this position is equally
applicable to fire & rescue & ambulance facilities;
19. A Schedule of Text & Policy Changes outline the changes sought to the draft text and
policies contained in the Preferred Options Local Plan, which is submitted as an
Accompanying Document.
20. In addition, 16 x form-based representations outline the changes sought, and are
submitted as Accompanying Documents.
21. Essex Police commend the changes sought in its representations which are considered
necessary to provide for a justified and comprehensive local plan, and look forward to
continuing its productive working relationship with the City Council and its retained consultants to that end