Object

Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document

Representation ID: 19882

Received: 30/04/2010

Respondent: Inner London Group

Agent: Christopher Wickham Associates

Representation Summary:

Option WGW4 is not supported for the reasons given in relation to WGW3. It would result in the coalescence of settlements, and would intrude damagingly into open countryside. Its eastern boundary would not be defensible, and development in this location would be remote from local services in Great Wakering. The alternative of providing a compact and contained form of development under WGW1 (and also including the land to the west of Alexandra Road) is clearly preferable in Green Belt, landscape and sustainability terms.

Full text:

Option WGW4 is not supported for the reasons given in relation to WGW3. It would result in the coalescence of settlements, and would intrude damagingly into open countryside. Its eastern boundary would not be defensible, and development in this location would be remote from local services in Great Wakering. The alternative of providing a compact and contained form of development under WGW1 (and also including the land to the west of Alexandra Road) is clearly preferable in Green Belt, landscape and sustainability terms.