Option WGW2

West Great Wakering 250 Dwellings:

Option WGW 2 (land south of the High Street only) - the identification of this land, owned by my client Swan Hill Homes Limited, is strongly supported. The land lies south of the High Street in Great Wakering and is well related to the existing pattern of settlement. To the south the site is bounded and enclosed by the existing fishing lakes and local wildlife site (also owned by Swan Hill Homes Limited). The existing lakes and associated land could be offered for transfer to the Council to provide open space uses as part of the housing development on the SHH land south of the High Street, in accordance with our client's
'Informal Submission' submitted to the Council in February 2007. This would contain the proposed housing development and partially screen it from view from the south.

To the west the site abuts the disused Star Lane brickworks, the Star Lane Industrial Estate and in the far north a telephone exchange. As such the western boundary of the site is well contained by existing built form. To the east, the site abuts a strip of open land running in a north-south alignment (i.e. Option WGW3 (part)) beyond which lies existing liner housing along the western side of Alexandra Road.

It is therefore clear that the Option WGW2 site is well contained on all boundaries and enjoys a good relationship with the existing pattern of settlement in the village.

Technical studies undertaken on behalf of our client have confirmed that access can be obtained from High Street through land owned by our client and there are no other infrastructure constraints that cannot be readily addressed and resolved.

The WGW1/2 site, extends to 8.02 ha, has a capacity of around 175 dwellings and is readily available for development and if allocated could be brought forward to supply new housing within 12 months of the adoption of the Allocations DPD. The development would include a range of house types and sizes, including affordable housing. In addition, the development of the site would bring wider benefits to the local community by virtue of transferring the fishing lakes/local wildlife site into public ownership to be used as a local facility and open space resource.

The site was promoted for allocation in the Rochford District Replacement Local Plan, whilst not allocated in the adopted plan the Local Plan Inquiry Inspector noted in his report:

'The site has advantages from its position in relation to the residential and adjacent employment area
if there was a need to allocate Greenfield land for development and to add to the population of Great
Wakering.'

In relation to the Green belt status of the site both the draft Core Strategy and Allocations DPD acknowledge that Green belt land will need to be allocated to accommodate 2,745 additional dwellings up to 2025. Given those circumstances it is necessary to 'test' the impact on the Green belt of each
potential site in order to determine which of the Green belt sites would have the least impact on Green belt objectives, in addition to being well related to an existing settlement and sustainable in its own right.

The 5 purposes for including land in the Green belt are set out in paragraph 1.5 of PPG2 Green belts:

- to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
- to prevent neighbouring towns from merging into one another;
- to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
- to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
- to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

It is therefore appropriate to 'test' the land south of the High Street against each of the 5 purposes.

To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas - housing development on the WGW1 site would be physically well contained by existing built form to the north, west and east and by the fishing lakes to the south. As such residential development on the site would not result in urban sprawl and would not therefore conflict with this purpose of including land in the Green belt.

To prevent neighbouring towns from merging into one another - housing development on the land south of the High Street would not cause any risk of the coalescence of any settlements (i.e. towns or villages) and as such would not conflict with this purpose of including land in the Green belt.

To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment - housing development on this site would be physically well contained by existing built form to the north, west and east and by the fishing lakes to the south. As such residential development on the site would not result in any discernable encroachment into the countryside and would not therefore conflict with this purpose of including land in the Green belt.

To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns - this purpose of including land in the Green belt does not apply at Great Wakering. Notwithstanding, because the proposed development is well related to the existing pattern of settlement it would be well integrated with the village and would also provide access to a new area of public open space including the fishing lakes to the south of the proposed housing site. Access to this area of open space would be provided direct from the High Street along the internal access roads serving the housing development. Therefore the proposed development would be integrated with the village and would improve the availability of useable accessible open space for the community.


To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land - whilst the land to the south of the High Street is currently an undeveloped green field site it is, in effect, enclosed on all sides, unused and under-used and its development for housing could make a useful contribution to meeting the district's housing requirement in a sustainable way and in a way which would bring wider public open space and environmental benefits to the local community. In addition as the site is enclosed on 3 sides by existing development and is un-used and under-used land it would make a contribution, in its own way to the regeneration of the village, either individually or in combination with other adjoining sites (i.e. Option WGW3) and the Star Lane disused brickworks site and the Star Lane Industrial Estate (SHLAA sites EL3 (Appendix D).

In summary it can be seen that the allocation of the land south of the High Street would not conflict with any of the 5 purposes of including land in the Green belt. As such there is a clear case for the land to be released from the Green belt and it does not perform any material or meaningful Green belt function.

Option WGW2 comprises two plots. Development of land to the west of Little Wakering Road would intrude into open countryside, and would harm the openness of the Green Belt. Its western boundary would not be defensible in PPG2 terms; further westerly expansion of development would be difficult to resist. The second plot to the south of High Street forms part of WGW1, and is strongly supported (see supporting representations on WGW1). The suggestion that its southern boundary would not be defensible is misleading because it forms part of a larger site (under WGW1) which has a highly defensible boundary.

Option WGW2, this option has two separate unconnected parcels, which do not follow existing field boundaries so it would be difficult to create defensible boundaries, contrary to PPG2.

Option WGW3, this option has three fragmented parcels around the settlement. Two of the parcels relate well to the existing settlement, however, the largest southernmost parcel is detached from Great Wakering and would extend further south than the existing settlement, very close to the boundary with Southend. This option would not have defensible boundaries and would result in coalescence with the built-up area of Southend, contrary to PPG2.

Option WGW4, this option involves a single parcel to the south of the brickworks, which is detached from the existing settlement and would extend further south than the existing settlement, very close to the boundary with Southend. This option would not have defensible boundaries and would result in coalescence with the built-up area of Southend, contrary to PPG2.

Option WGW5, is located adjacent to the existing settlement but extends further west, which raises concerns with sustainability in terms of accessing facilities and services and the creation of a defensible Green Belt boundary.

The preferred option is WGW1 as this is developed in one location and is close to the High Street, and as such would add to the cohesion of the existing settlement.

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.