Option SEA2

Option SEA2

This site covers an area of around 17 hectares and could only accommodate around 380 to 500 dwellings. As identified above, it is likely that a scheme in this location would be relatively low density and therefore a scheme would be likely to generate a supply of housing in the region of the lower estimate. This site area is therefore too small and a larger site should be identified.

The Council comment that the impacts of increased traffic movement on Oxford Road would need to be carefully considered. It should be noted that development in this location could be accessed off Ashingdon Road and Oxford Road. Furthermore, the proposed bus access route and turning circle as part of the 'East Ashingdon' proposals would result in a decrease in vehicular movements, particularly buses, along Oxford Road.

The Council also comments that it would be difficult to create a defensible green belt boundary. It is submitted in response that the eastern side of the site follows an existing field boundary which would be enhanced with further planting and that the southern boundary could also be carefully screened and designed to minimise impact. However, as identified above, increasing the site area would increase the opportunity to create a defensible green belt boundary.

Option SEA2 extends further east than the current built up area of Rochford. At this point this site therefore encroaches into the green belt. It will be difficult to create defensible green belt boundaries to the east, south, and part of the north of the site where the site adjoins open fields.

Unlike Option SEA1, these options (SEA2 & SEA3) do not 'square off' the settlement and as such would not relate well to the existing residential areas; this would also result in an awkward area of Green Belt to the south.

The existence of the gap to the south of these options would also have a detrimental affect on their connectivity with the town centre and would not offer the same opportunities to create new pedestrian and cycle routes along the eastern boundary. This would funnel all vehicle, pedestrian and cycle movements along Ashingdon Road, which would add to the congestion.

Both of these options (SEA2 & SEA3) would also extend further east into the surrounding countryside than the residential areas to the north and south, not only would this result in urban sprawl and would not be able to create defensible boundaries, contrary to PPG2.

Paragraph 5.2 of PPS12 states that DPDs should adhere to the same advice on justification and effectiveness as applies to Core
Strategies. Paragraph 4.36 is particularly cited and this states that the "most appropriate strategy should be adopted when
considered against reasonable alternatives".

It is considered that the emerging DPD does not accord with the advice since some of the options are simply not realistic when
considered against normal land use criteria for selecting sustainable urban extensions. Whilst not necessarily endorsing the strategic location, the following sub options are not seen as realistic and should be discounted

- WR2
- WR4
- WH1
- SC1
- SC2
- SEA2
- SEA3
- WGW2
- WGW3.

RE: ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS



Thank you for giving Anglian Water the opportunity to comment on the above document.



Please find our comments summarized on the attached document.