Dry Street can't be protected (From Echo)

Dry Street can't be protected

6:55am Wednesday 10th October 2007 in News By Jon Austin

POPULAR beauty spots Dry Street and Barn Hall are under threat again, after the Government refused to grant them green belt status.

Basildon Council applied to have the areas protected following battles to stop thousands of homes being built there.

However, the Echo has learned the green belt applications had been rejected.

This will raise concerns among the thousands of people who have campaigned to save Dry Street, in Basildon, and Barn Hall, in Wickford, that fresh planning applications will be lodged.

Geoff Williams, Lib Dem group leader on Basildon Council, said: "The Government has refused green belt status, but it had better be prepared for a battle."

Green belt status would have made it easier to turn down plans to build homes on the areas of natural beauty.

Now developer Gleeson Homes, which owns 100-acres at Barn Hall, off Station Avenue, Wickford, will feel more confident of gaining approval for 200 homes on the site, later this year.

English Partnerships is also now expected to submit revised plans for homes at Dry Street, ahead of a public inquiry about the future of the district.

The Echo's Save Dry Street campaign was backed by 10,000 readers and convinced English Partnerships to ditch earlier plans for 12,000 houses.

Jacqueline Boynes, of Station Avenue, Wickford, spearheaded Wickford North Action Group's fight against the homes planned for Barn Hall. She said: "This is the worst possible news."

The council first tried to give both sites green belt protection when it drew up a local plan for the district last year, but that document was never finalised.

It is is now working on a local development Council leader Malcolm Buckley said: "Because the previous plan has expired and we do not yet have a replacement, there was no planning policy for the district and not even any green belt policy.

"It meant we had to ask the Government to retain some of the old policy from the former plan, which it agreed.

"But we also asked it to adopt some of the new policy from the last plan, which would have meant green belt status for both sites. It did not agree to this, so we are in the same position.

"Both sites are special reserve for housing, if we cannot meet our housing targets."