Is this the beginning of Development of the Waterfront?

Approval of Planning Application for the Old Oyster Shed sets a dangerous precedent for residential development along Coast Road.

You may not know about this as the notices required are nowhere to be found near the site but the Old Oyster Shed (cream with red roof near the oyster beds on Coast Road) have applied for permission to turn what was originally rebuilt to be a restaurant into a residential dwelling. Mersea Island Society feel that if approval is given this will open the floodgates to redevelopment of the waterside.

Please go onto Colchester City Council's website and register your objection. https://www.colchester.gov.uk/planning-comment/?userid=251209

Here are all the reasons why this goes against what Mersea is about it.

Precedent and Policy Conflict

Approving this application sets a dangerous precedent for residential development along Coast Road.

Heritage and Conservation Area Impact

1. The site lies within the West Mersea Conservation Area and contributes to its historic maritime character.

2. Converting it to a dwelling introduces domestic features that undermine the area’s character.

3. Policy SS12b of the Colchester Local Plan requires development to preserve or enhance heritage and maritime settings.

4. The proposal offers no public heritage benefit to outweigh the harm.

Loss of Employment and Local Economic Use

1. The existing Class E(b) use supports local jobs and tourism activity. No viability evidence has been submitted to justify loss of this employment use.

2. Policy SS12b and national planning guidance resist loss of commercial uses without strong justification.

3. Removing the potential for a niche restaurant or diminishes the local coastal economy.

4. The proposal conflicts with the aims of the West Mersea Neighbourhood Plan, which prioritises marine-related employment and heritage uses.

5. No evidence of public benefit or community support has been provided.

6. The change of use contradicts several key objectives in the adopted Colchester Local Plan and NPPF.

Environmental and Habitat Impact

1. The site borders SSSI, SPA, and Ramsar-designated marshland.

2. Residential use may increase light pollution, domestic disturbance, and recreational pressure on protected habitats.

3. The proposal has not provided an ecological impact assessment or mitigation strategy.

4. Conflicts with Policy SS12b, which prohibits harm to sensitive coastal environments.

   
   

Flood Risk and Unsustainable Development

1. The site is within Flood Zone 3 and lacks formal flood defences.

2. The Shoreline Management Plan recommends 'no active intervention' for this stretch of coast.

3. Residential (C3) is a ‘more vulnerable’ use under NPPF flood guidance.

4. Proposal fails to meet flood safety standards in Policy DM23 of the Local Plan and NPPF Para 170.