4. COAST AND ESTUARIES

Introduction

4.1 The Borough’s coastal area is a critical and therefore irreplaceable natural asset. It supports a number of diverse and competing interests including internationally important habitats, land and water-based recreation, fishing, archaeological and historic features. It is also home to a number of sizeable communities.

4.2 Colchester’s coastline contains many valuable archaeological features; these are subject to the policies contained within Chapter 6, “Urban and Environmental Archaeology”. In particular, Policy UEA7 will apply.

4.3 In previous years these interests have been dealt with under the “Urban Environment and Archaeology” or the “Leisure, Recreation and Tourism” chapters of the Local Plan. The need to ensure that development is sustainable and the implications of sea level rise have brought coastal issues to the fore. The importance placed upon coastal management is emphasised by Central Government and County Council policy and reinforced by English Nature and the Environment Agency.

4.4 The communities of West Mersea and Wivenhoe possess a number of industries that provide local employment and define their distinctive characters, most notably the fishing industry, including the shellfisheries. The leisure boating industry also makes a vital contribution to local employment. Despite being located within such an internationally valuable environment, the continued viability of these industries is not innately incompatible with nature conservation objectives of the Plan.

4.5 The designation of the Marine Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protection Area (SPA) for Birds under the Habitats Regulation (see paragraph 4.12) are based on nature conservation interests. The aim is to ensure that those activities are undertaken in ways that do not threaten the nature conservation interest, and wherever possible, support and safeguard local marine industries and conserve the natural environment. However, the Directive supports the principles of sustainable development and there is no intention to exclude human activities from SACs.

4.6 Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 20, “Coastal Planning”, states that the coastal zone will be defined by local circumstances. The extent of the coastal area for the purposes of the Local Plan is illustrated on the Proposals Map. This area has been defined by a number of factors: the presence of the Coastal Protection Belt (Policy CC1 in Essex and Southend-on-Sea Replacement Structure Plan [Adopted April 2001]), the tidal limit of the Colne Estuary, the mean low water mark on the seaward facing coastline, and the enclosed nature of the majority of the Borough’s coastline.

4.7 In addition to planning policies dedicated to the coast, the Borough is also involved in the preparation and implementation of Estuary Management Plans. The Blackwater Management Plan was published in 1996 and the Colne Estuary Strategy in 1999. The purpose of these plans is to complement the statutory Local Plan by dealing with matters beyond planning control and to develop joint objectives with other authorities; this underlines the Borough’s commitment to the sustainable use of the coastal area.

4.8 Pressures created by both land and water-based recreation along the Borough’s coastline can usually be reconciled with its conservation objectives. Most of the coast is within the European and International designated sites shown on the Proposals Map, and is therefore subject to a consent process for plans and projects which, under the Habitats Regulations 1994, includes a formal procedure embodying the precautionary principle. The remaining parts of the coast include other areas sensitive for their nature conservation value and defined by national or local designations. Here, application of the precautionary principle, while not mandatory, is a useful guide to inform decision- making so as to secure sustainable development. The aim of the policies in the plan should be to balance and reconcile interests and to contain adverse impacts of development through appropriate management measures. Where such policies provide scope for additional facilities for recreational use of coastal areas, it will be necessary to assess the impact of a proposal on the local environment, cumulatively with other developments and existing facilities. Doing so is part of the wider process of assessing the capacity of the local environment to accommodate further recreation.

4.9 Public access to the coast should be a basic principle unless it can be demonstrated that this is damaging to nature conservation or impractical. Any new development should incorporate public-access opportunities through planning obligations.

Objectives

4.10 The objectives for the coastal area are:

a) To balance and reconcile interests where possible

b) To protect the European Sites. A development likely to have a significant effect on a Site can be permitted only if assessment shows that it will not adversely affect the Site’s integrity, unless there are no alternatives to the proposal and the development must be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest. In such circumstances, compensatory measures will be required as a condition of any consent;

c) To protect the other International, National and local sites of nature conservation importance (including Ramsar Sites, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, National and Local Nature Reserves and Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation) from development likely to have a detrimental effect on a site, and to use a precautionary approach when there is doubt about the impact of a proposal;

d) To ensure that new development is not located in areas identified as being at risk from flooding or coastal erosion;

e) To enhance the coastal environment, particularly in relation to nature conservation interests

f) To ensure that only essential development which actually requires a coastal location is carried out on the undeveloped coastline.

Policies

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL CONSIDERATIONS

4.11 It is important to note that all policies contained within this chapter must be read alongside the overall Development Control Policy (DC1). This policy sets out the standard planning criteria applicable to all forms of development. The relevant criteria will be used to assess the suitability of any proposal, in addition to the following detailed policy guidance

THE OPEN AND UNDEVELOPED COASTLINE

4.12 The Borough’s coastline includes substantial parts of the Colne and Blackwater Estuaries. These estuaries form part of the Greater Thames Estuary, one of the most important wetland habitats in Europe. The Colne and Blackwater Estuaries are themselves of great nature conservation value, being designated as SPAs, as Ramsar sites and as Essex Estuaries Marine SAC. The boundaries of these international designations include those of the SSSI boundaries, as shown on the Proposals Map. There are also sites of national and local importance and the Essex Wildlife Trust have identified Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) following a Borough-wide survey. The Borough also contains the Colne Estuary National Nature Reserve (NNR) and part of the Blackwater Estuary (NNR). These international and national designations are explained in the Glossary.

4.13 The Council will use its planning powers to prevent new development harmful to wildlife habitats wherever it can do so. It will also work with landowners through its countryside management service to achieve sympathetic management of such habitat areas. These issues are dealt with in greater detail in Chapter 5, “Countryside”, under Policy CO5.

4.14 The Borough Council will also promote measures that resolve conflict between different uses and users, that enhance the appearance of the coast, and that provide for improved public access, where appropriate. And, to this end, they will promote Coastal Management Projects and encourage co-operation between different interests.

4.15 Essex County Council produced the Essex Coast Protection Subject Plan in 1984. This defined the Coastal Protection Belt. As the Subject Plan will be replaced by the Colchester Borough Local Plan, its objectives are incorporated within this and other chapters. The coastal area is defined by the Borough Council’s designation of the Coast and Mersea Island Countryside Conservation Area shown on the Proposals Map. Policy CO3 seeks to protect this and other Countryside Conservation Areas in the Borough.

4.16 Planning guidance (PPG20 on the Coast and PPG9 on Nature Conservation), emphasises the importance of reflecting the objectives of national and international designations. Collectively they advise that the undeveloped coastline, particularly designated areas, be protected and, where possible, enhanced. Any development that is likely to affect the nature conservation value of a designated site should not be permitted. The Government’s advice supports this “precautionary principle” in relation to sensitive areas.

 

CE1 Development will be resisted on the undeveloped coastline. Development for which a coastal location is considered essential will be restricted to the developed coastline.

RISK OF FLOODING

4.17 The nature of the Borough’s coastal area and the natural processes shaping the landform results in it being at particular risk from flooding and erosion. Planning policy should aim to minimise the risk and avoid putting further development at risk. In 1954 the Waverley Committee, following the floods of 1953, recommended that development below the 5-metre contour should not be permitted. Consequently development along some areas of the Borough coastline will be at risk from tidal flooding. The construction of the Colne Barrier at Wivenhoe has significantly improved the level of tidal flood protection upstream of Wivenhoe.

4.18 Although the barrier affords a level of protection equivalent to a 1-in-1000 year event, this protection is not absolute. The Borough Council will continue to consult the Environment Agency on any development proposals below the 5 metre contour upstream of the Colne Barrier. A total ban on further development in areas of flood risk is impractical, but it is desirable to ensure that residential uses are not intensified or introduced. Therefore any development proposed within the coastal area as defined on the Proposals Map will have to provide information on the height above sea level of the site.

 

CE2 Proposals that further intensify or introduce residential uses in areas at risk to tidal flooding will be refused. Other forms of development will be permitted only if it can be shown that it is essential for the proposed development to be located within an area at risk from flooding. In addition, any necessary remedial flood defence measures will be implemented without detriment to any other areas.

COASTAL PROTECTION AND FLOOD DEFENCE

4.19 In low-lying undeveloped coastal areas, which include much of the coastal environment in the Borough, it may not be economically justified to maintain the existing coastal defence. Planning policy should take this into account and encourage consideration of alternative soft engineering options such as managed retreat, an issue considered extensively in the Blackwater Estuary Management Plan and the Essex Shoreline Management Plan. It must be stressed that such encouragement will be tempered by the Plan’s objectives for the coastal area, the need to strike a balance between economic and environmental priorities and the requirements of the Habitats Regulations. When considering a proposal for managed retreat, the impact on biodiversity and access to the countryside will need to be assessed. The Borough Council will need to consider the views of English Nature, the Essex Wildlife Trust, the Environment Agency and the Colchester Natural History Society on the impact of the proposal on local biodiversity. The proposal will also be assessed in the context of the relevant policies L14 and L15 in Chapter 10, “Leisure, Recreation and Tourism”. These relate to the protection and improvement of public rights of way and footpaths.

 

CE3 Proposals for alternative/soft engineering methods of coastal protection or flood defence will be supported providing such a proposal is not irreconcilable with the need to maintain biodiversity and access to the countryside.

RESIDENTIAL HOLIDAY SITES

4.20 The coastal environment attracts a wide variety of tourist related activities, many of which increase the pressure for development in the area. PPG 21, Tourism, recognises the need to safeguard the important sensitive nature conservation areas, particularly where they are covered by national and international designations. In relation to holiday caravan sites, it supports the need for seasonal occupancy restrictions to protect the local environment, particularly where the site is near a sensitive habitat which requires peace and quiet to allow seasonal breeding or winter feeding to take place. In relation to Mersea Youth Camp, the Council feels that, although it provides visitor accommodation to a wide variety of different groups, in essence this is residential holiday accommodation. It is therefore also subject to the criteria in Policy CE4.

4.21 Whilst the Borough Council is committed to the promotion of tourism and tourist facilities (see Chapter 10, “Leisure, Recreation and Tourism”), as the Local Planning Authority it must have regard to impact on other facilities. In the coastal area, particular attention must be given to environmental factors.

4.22 Existing sites for residential holiday development, including static caravans, chalets and campsites, are all clustered along the coastline of Mersea Island. This kind of development does raise a number of problems, including:

(a) the provision of services;

(b) traffic generation;

(c) pressures on the coastal zone and the open countryside;

(d) visual amenity, including absorption of the development into the local landscape setting;

(e) possible harm to important wildlife sites;

(f) the risk of flooding to property and site access.

4.23 For the above reasons, the Council opposes the development of new sites for this type of use, including static caravan, chalet and camping sites.

4.24 However, the Council recognises the contribution that the existing sites make to the local economy and would not wish to place excessive controls that could lead to their closure. Equally there are benefits from upgrading existing sites facilities in terms of attracting and retaining clients. Such improvements would not necessarily mean an increase in the number of units, but would primarily allow the development of better amenities. However, there may be a small increase in the number of units on a site, which would be dependent upon the individual circumstances of a proposal. In exceptional circumstances there may be potential for considering minor extensions to existing sites. Each of these would need to be considered on its own merits and, in view of the sensitive nature of the coastal area, are unlikely to be anything other than minor in nature. Any limited extension or improvement to a site will be acceptable only if mitigating works that would be of benefit to the environment are carried out. Such work would include the landscaping of the site to minimise its visual impact on the sensitive coastal landscape and the enhancement of the nature conservation value of the local area.

4.25 In judging the merits of environmental benefits arising from any proposal, the Council will balance those benefits against any adverse impacts (including those listed above) of extending the site.

 

CE4 New residential holiday sites and residential visitor sites within or close to the coastal area will not be permitted. Minor extensions to existing sites and development for the improvement of facilities on existing sites will be permitted only where this would result in a significant benefit to the local environment and/ or to the site itself.

OCCUPANCY RESTRICTIONS FOR CARAVANS

4.26 As leisure time increases, and the standard and design of static caravans advances, there is a trend towards extending the holiday season – once traditionally the summer months – into the winter. As a result, there is increasing pressure to extend the period of occupancy on caravan sites and to increase facilities. Such proposals need to be approached carefully, particularly in view of the environmentally sensitive nature of the locations of the existing sites in the Borough.

4.27 The issue of occupancy becomes most controversial in winter months, when the harm from the disturbance to bird life is greatest. Most of the established caravan sites in the coastal area were granted planning consent with a condition restricting the period of occupancy. The existing sites are close to or abut either the Blackwater Estuary or Colne Estuary SSSI, both internationally designated areas which are included within the Mid Essex SPA and Ramsar Site, and the Essex Estuaries SAC. In addition, Mersea Flats form the Colne National Nature Reserve. These designations reflect the importance of the area for nature conservation and wildlife. In particular, many nationally important scarce plants and invertebrates are supported, providing extensive feeding areas for a number of species of wildfowl and waders present in internationally important numbers, including Dark-Bellied Brent Geese, Ringed Plovers and Dunlin.

4.28 During the winter period, the estuaries are particularly sensitive to human activities because the waterfowl can be relatively easily disturbed from their feeding and roosting sites by the activities of people. These sites and the birds they support therefore form fragile habitats in winter and need careful protection. Severe winter weather conditions exacerbate problems caused by disturbance because the energy expended by birds becomes critical to their survival. In relation to the use of caravan sites, during the critical winter months the “precautionary principle” will be applied. Due to the likely disturbance to fragile habitats, any extension for use during the winter will create unacceptable harm. An exception would be where a particular site already enjoys more lenient occupancy periods and it can be demonstrated that the interests of wildlife and adjoining occupiers are not adversely affected by these more generous periods of occupation being applied to alterations and extensions to the existing site.

4.29 Caravans are unsuitable for permanent residential use, both in terms of the accommodation and their location. Gradual erosion of occupancy restrictions could lead towards the opportunity for permanent use. This would be unacceptable and place undue demands on the existing infrastructure and community of Mersea Island, as well as being unacceptable in nature conservation terms and probably undermining the local holiday industry. It is therefore considered necessary to ensure that a use intended for holiday purposes is retained as such and for periods during which disturbance is less of a critical issue.

 

CE5 Proposals to extend the period of occupancy of caravans on sites on Mersea Island will be refused where it is considered likely that these would have a detrimental effect on residential amenity and sensitive habitats, particularly those forming part of or adjoining an SSSI, NNR, Ramsar site, SPA or Special Area of Conservation. In cases where permission to extend the period of occupancy may be acceptable in principle, planning permission will be granted only if: (a) occupancy is restricted to the period from 1 March to 30 November inclusive; (b) occupancy is restricted to holiday purposes only. Less restrictive conditions in line with existing occupancy conditions will be imposed on alterations and extensions to existing caravan sites on Mersea Island where it can be shown that those existing conditions have not given rise to conflict with wildlife interests or the amenities of adjoining permanent residents. Furthermore, agreement will be sought regarding closure of accesses to the estuary during sensitive periods of the year.

DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES IN THE COASTAL AREA

4.30 It has long been an established planning policy in Essex to safeguard the County’s undeveloped coastline because of its value as a resource in its own right, because of its attractive landscape character, and because of its importance for nature conservation and for informal recreation. The Plan proposes to continue giving priority to the protection of the coastline, and the development of major water recreation facilities, such as marinas, will be resisted in this zone.

4.31 Similarly, the Plan seeks to minimise the cumulative impact of the piecemeal development of the estuaries by individual or small-scale mooring proposals. As both the Colne and Blackwater Estuaries are designated European sites, the Conservation (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1994 requires an environmental impact assessment as part of any planning proposal in these areas. On an individual basis, these proposals may not present any significant adverse environmental effect. Collectively, however, they may prove to be just as damaging to the coastal environment as large-scale marina/water-recreation developments. In this regard, the same issues apply; the deterioration of water quality, the adverse affect on the hydrodynamics of the local area and an erosion of the open and natural character of the landscape. In addition, piecemeal mooring development can threaten the viability of existing oyster beds. This is due not only to the deterioration of water quality but also to the change of use of dormant oyster beds, resulting in their permanent loss. This is unacceptable as it would prejudice the future viability of local shellfisheries.

4.32 The following policy therefore restricts mooring development to the developed coastline, thus supporting the objectives of Policy CE1, to protect stretches of undeveloped coastline in the Borough, given their importance in landscape terms, as wildlife habitats and as a finite economic resource. SPG will be prepared to guide leisure boating development in the coastal area in the context of this policy.

 

CE6 Proposals for permanent mooring development will be refused permission if the proposal is not readily accessible from the established access points in the main coastal settlements of West Mersea, Wivenhoe or Rowhedge and if the capacity of water space is insufficient to accommodate any increased recreational or commercial activity. In addition, the proposal must not: (a) involve the development of previously undisturbed areas or creeks; (b) create access problems and onshore development pressures in the countryside; (c) damage or erode the natural character and the landscape of the coastal area.

Cook’s Shipyard and Rowhedge Port Regeneration Areas

4.33 The waterside areas of both Wivenhoe and Rowhedge contain maritime sites that have ceased to operate in their original function. It is necessary to plan and promote possible redevelopment to the benefit of their respective communities. Whilst the two sites have many similarities, they also have unique issues and features which are examined in the following text.

4.34 By directing development to the developed coastline, it is important to ensure that the unique waterfront characteristics of Rowhedge and Wivenhoe are not overwhelmed by major new developments, be they related to water recreation or any other use. A development brief for the Rowhedge Port Regeneration Area provides further detailed guidance.

4.35 Located at the eastern end of Wivenhoe’s waterside frontage, the Cook’s Shipyard site has remained largely undeveloped since business ceased on the site in 1987. A service road for the Colne Barrier and the Wivenhoe Sailing Club’s clubhouse cuts across the site and was constructed as part of the two developments in the early 1990s. Following a boundary change, the whole of the site is now within Colchester’s area.

4.36 Located at the south-east of the village, Rowhedge Wharf has until recently been used as a commercial wharf. It is currently being used as a solely land-based transport and distribution centre. The closure of Colchester Harbour makes it important to set out the planning criteria for any future development of this important site.

4.37 A suitable balance and mix of uses should be one of the prime policy objectives for both Cook’s Shipyard and Rowhedge Wharf. The mixed use approach embraces the principles of sustainability by locating new build on already developed “brownfield” sites. This approach is crucial in reducing development pressure on “greenfield” sites elsewhere in the Borough and building on the local community.

4.38 Finally it is important to stress that, although the plan seeks to promote redevelopment of these two sites, the sensitive character of the local environment means that not all land is suitable or proposed for built development.

Objectives

• To promote the optimum redevelopment of the regeneration areas;

• To promote the vitality and viability of the respective settlements;

• To promote sustainable forms of development ;

• To implement a mix of uses compatible with the location and character of each settlement;

• To optimise the riverside location of both sites, including securing public access;

• To encourage environmental quality which will enhance the character of each settlement and this part of the Colne and Roman River Valleys;

• To secure a standard of environmental and visual quality, which will enhance the character, and setting of each settlement;

• To protect and enhance the adjacent nature conservation value and landscape quality

WIVENHOE

4.39 A development brief for the site was adopted as SPG for the site in 1990; this was based on the wholly residential allocation in the Adopted Plan. Significant changes in national planning guidance, the introduction of sustainable development principles and the increasing focus placed on coastal issues have since made it necessary to withdraw the SPG and to reconsider the possible types of development for this site.

4.40 The issue of traffic generation is of particular importance to the site, given its narrow and tortuous access roads, which run through high-density residential areas. It is essential, therefore, to minimise the levels of both commercial and private vehicle movements. The total amount of development and its precise use will largely be determined by the impact of traffic through Wivenhoe. This can be determined only through a traffic impact assessment. Particular emphasis will be placed upon the impact of any proposal to the flow of traffic through Anglesea Road, which is at the present inadequate and will not support any significant increase in traffic without improvement. Any additional traffic should not follow this route. In view of the difficult nature of the access roads for heavy vehicles, agreements will be sought as part of any permission to require construction materials to be brought to the site by alternative routes and/or methods.

4.41 The site’s close proximity to the rail network, the Sustrans National Cycleway route (Wivenhoe Cycleway) and frequent bus services provide an ideal opportunity to encourage car-free residential development in line with the principles of Chapter 11, “Transport”, and specifically Policy T4 on car-free residential development. This would assist in reducing traffic generation, but some provision will need to be made in order to provide minimal visitor car parking and servicing for the site. The Council is also keen to promote pedestrians and cycling routes into and through the site. All proposals will be required to take account of these objectives.

4.42 The river frontage to the site is a major and important feature, which will provide significant opportunities to maximise the site’s maritime links and provide a major public amenity for the village. A requirement of any development proposal for the site will be to secure the retention and beneficial future management of the slipways and jetty, and the guarantee that the quay and wet-dock area will be committed to unrestricted public pedestrian access, including the provision of facilities for, and use by, local fishermen

ROWHEDGE

4.43 The site is accessible by two roads, the High Street and a private haul road. The High Street is at present heavily trafficked and also extensively used for car parking. Any significant increases in traffic volume along it will be unacceptable in terms of pedestrian and highway safety. The High Street will therefore only allow for minimal vehicle access to any future development. However, it is the intention of the Council to promote pedestrian and cycle routes from the High Street and village into and through the site.

4.44 The private haul road is currently being used by the transport company as the main route to and from the warehousing on the docks. The main access to any new development will be routed along this road. The use of this road as the main access to any development will require an assessment of its impact to Old Heath. Increased traffic generation along this route may therefore require improvements in Old Heath. Further consideration may be given to a pedestrian/cycle bridge between Wivenhoe and Rowhedge to maximise the use of sustainable modes of travel.

4.45 Any proposal will need to address the future of Rowhedge Pits, which are designated a SINC. At present, local residents use the pits for informal recreation. Sensitive management in the future will provide a major opportunity to maximise their recreation potential for the local community and optimise the nature conservation value of the area. Applications will need to demonstrate via a master plan how they will maximise the potential integration of this important area.

4.46 Located along the High Street of Rowhedge are a number of small businesses that provide valuable local services. The loss of these businesses would be detrimental to the sustainable future of the village. Following the construction of the two consented residential developments, it is considered that the remaining mixed use character of the High Street should be protected and retained. The importance of commercial uses is not a particular issue at Wivenhoe Quay, as the only one remaining is the now underused warehouse premises of Messrs Wilkin and Son, located at the extreme western end. Indeed it may be preferable in amenity terms if this commercial use was replaced, as it is now effectively surrounded by residential development following the redevelopment of Wivenhoe Port. It is felt, however, that the public house, Nottage Institute and Royal British Legion, all located in the central part of the quay between Anchor Hill and Rose Lane, provide important local community facilities and should not be lost. In accordance with Policies CF4 and TCS13, the Council will resist any applications for change of use along Rowhedge High Street and the central part of Wivenhoe Quay, especially applications for conversion or redevelopment to residential use.

REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH SITES

Access to the River

4.47 Due to their prominent riverside location, redevelopment of either site provides the opportunity to maximise the potential for riverside access for the public. Both developments will be required to incorporate a satisfactory means of promoting and providing public access to the river.

Footpaths

4.48 It will also be a requirement of any scheme to keep existing public footpaths. Where this is not practical in the context of a proposal, diversion of the line of the public footpath may be acceptable, provided that a satisfactory alternative alignment incorporating key features such as riverfront access or passage across the site is retained. This will be subject to the standard statutory procedures.

Landscape, Design and Conservation

4.49 The importance of the Wivenhoe waterside in terms of its architectural value and its unique character is emphasised by the designation of the Wivenhoe Conservation Area, of which the site forms part. Although Rowhedge Wharf is not within Rowhedge Conservation Area, it adjoins it and occupies a prominent position in the landscape. Therefore the design and layout of any proposal must be compatible with the character of the surrounding area and urban and valley landscape. The impact on the skyline of both settlements will be particularly important. Proposals must also comply with the policies on development within Conservation Areas in Chapter 6, “Urban Environment and Archaeology” (namely Policies UEA1-3 and UEA7), the general principles for design and the “Essex Design Guide for Residential and Mixed Use Areas” (adopted as SPG in 1997). The proximity of the Colne SSSI will be important in determining the type and impact of any development. Proposals must not prejudice the integrity of the SSSI.

TRANSPORT

4.50 Proposals will be required to demonstrate how the proposed traffic generation can be accommodated on the local highway network and its likely impact on residential amenity. The study will also need to show how the levels and types of vehicle movements will be managed, bearing in mind the particular uses proposed.

4.51 Development proposals will also be required to demonstrate how they will minimise private car traffic. This may be shown by providing evidence of matching proposed uses to existing local need and providing safe routes of desire lines for cyclists and pedestrians, including routes to bus stops. The design of any vehicular streets will be required to follow the traffic calming and safety principles of the “Essex Design Guide for Mixed Use and Residential Areas”.

USES

4.52 The preferred use for both sites is an integrated mixture of uses including residential, business (B1), community facilities and small-scale leisure/tourism facilities specifically linked to the riverside locations and with access to the waterfront. The possible impact on the amenity of the existing and new residential uses will need to be considered. The provision of affordable housing is required on both sites as part of a mixed scheme, although the specific type and amount will depend upon the assessed needs in the respective communities. The Plan also seeks to promote additional shopping facilities in the Rowhedge Regeneration Area to serve the village. All applications will be required to provide sufficient detail to demonstrate how the proposals would fit with and contribute towards the strategic objectives and development criteria concerning:

• The provision of river access;

• The maintenance of public rights of way;

• The relationship with the adjoining built fabric;

• The minimisation and calming of private motorised road traffic and the maintenance of a balance of uses.

 

CE9 Along Rowhedge High Street and that part of Wivenhoe Quay between Anchor Hill and Rose Lane, proposals for change of use or redevelopment of existing commercial or community uses to residential will be resisted.

WEST MERSEA

4.54 Mersea lies just off the coast and is connected to the mainland at low water by a causeway known as the Strood. The Island has two very distinct settlements: East Mersea, with a very scattered population and largely agricultural background; and West Mersea, the principal settlement, with a local economy based on an important yachting and boat building centre, a holiday destination and a fishing centre.

4.55 Many of the pressures referred to earlier in this chapter apply to West Mersea as tourists, conservationists, fishermen, yachtsmen, residents and visitors all compete to take advantage of what West Mersea has to offer. With such a large and varied demand on so small an area, the inevitable conflicts between different users arise. These issues are explored in more depth in the Blackwater Management Plan.

4.56 Many of the policies contained in this chapter, and some in Chapter 5, “Countryside”, have a direct bearing on activities along the West Mersea waterfront. In addition, the overwhelming majority of the estuarine frontage of West Mersea comprises the West Mersea Waterside Conservation Area. Consequently, Chapter 6, “Urban Environment and Archaeology”, will also be applicable to any development proposal. It should also be noted that the Plan makes provision for adequate off-street parking and West Mersea under Policy T10.

4.57 Traffic congestion and, in particular, lack of public car parking provision are long-standing problems in Coast Road. Therefore, where development can be approved under this policy and where site conditions allow, appropriate provision for further seasonal public car parking as part of that development will be sought by means of a Section 106 Agreement (S106 Agreement).

4.58 Objectives for West Mersea:

• To safeguard and protect the character of the settlement and in particular to resolve the conflicts of interest in the waterside area;

• To protect the open countryside surrounding West Mersea which forms part of the Coastal Protection Belt and the Coast and Mersea Island Countryside Conservation Area;

• To make provision for limited additional residential development;

• To make provision for further open space.

4.59 The Council is concerned to conserve and improve the character of West Mersea Waterside. To that end, policies have been formulated to provide a comprehensive and detailed framework for considering the whole range of likely development proposals for the area.

4.60 Similarly, the Council would not wish to resist changes of use or new development at the Waterside, provided they were compatible with the character of the area. The loss of existing uses which contribute to the character of the area, eg the boat yards, will be acceptable only if they were to be replaced by a new use equally compatible with that character and which needed to be located in this area.

 

CE10 West Mersea Waterside Area of Special Character will be protected and enhanced. Within this area, the following will apply: (a) Proposals for development and changes of use on both the landward and seaward sides of Coast Road will maintain the traditional character of the area and its role as a major yachting, fishing and boating centre; (b) Proposals which would result in development of existing undeveloped areas of foreshore will be refused; (c) With regard to the boatyard/storage and other related maritime uses and sites: 1. The expansion or development of existing premises/sites for this type of use will be permitted only where: (i) the proposal would enhance the existing character of the Waterside Conservation Area; (ii) the development would not result in unacceptable levels of traffic or increase the threat to road safety; (iii) there is no adverse impact on residential amenity. 2. The redevelopment of, or change of use of sites/premises will be permitted only where: (i) the new use or development will contribute towards and be compatible with the special traditional maritime character of the area; and (ii) there is a proven need for it to be located in or on the premises concerned.