Wickford Action Group: Runwell Towers

The pictures show the site as it was in 2006. On the corner was a recently closed Kwik-Fit tyre and exhaust garage, and next to it a similar one called Quick Fix. After Kwik-Fit eventually closed, the site was taken over by Quick Fix, who were there until 2020. Also on the site was a Citroen showroom, and a second hand car dealer, Tudor Cars.

Below is the history of the development, see also 'The Elephant in the Room'

Plan A
The first plan for the site was described in the Wickford Masterplan of 2006 - remember that???
The Runwell Road site 'will provide a high quality northern gateway with town houses and commercial activity.' The proposal was for 35 one to five bedroom 'town houses' with some active frontages at ground floor to provide leisure / office use. The Masterplan was submitted to residents for approval. There were over 600 flats described, including the other monstrosity along the Jubilee Rd bypass, (part of which has now of course been built). The Wickford Action Group was set up at that time in order to oppose this Masterplan, and we had a tremendous support from the public. Actually, the proposal for the 35 town houses on the Runwell Road site was one of the developments we would have been happy with. BUT, when the Masterplan was actually published, AFTER the consultation, the 35 town houses had been changed to a 5 story block of 84 flats!

Plan B

06/00001/FULL was for a block of 84 flats was dubbed Runwell Towers by residents, and was very much opposed. The Council planning committee held in public rejected the proposal from the mysterious 'Butie Limited', registered in the British Virgin Islands, where directors are not named. They appealed the refusal, and the residents were all geared up to attend the council's desision meeting, but at the last minute we were told in a letter from the council dated 31 May 2007, that the appeal had been withdrawn. But we had been outflanked, because they had made a simultaneous unpublished application 'in writing' which was granted approval by a government inspector. We challenged the legality of this smart move by the planners, but were advised there was nothing to be done!
The plot with planning approval was then sold on to Explore Living, part of the Laing Group, who boarded up the site and cleared it - but apart from an exploratory drilling, no building has taken place since then, which was blamed on the financial turndown, and after pressure to the Council from the Wickford Action Group, the advertising boards were removed in June 2012 and the site tidied up.
The only winners so far from this non-development are the previous owners of the site, including the then Chelmsford Councillor Ray Ride.

Talk about dodgy dealing! Read what the Echo said

Here are a couple of posters we used to draw attention to the issues.

Plan C

Planning application 18/00519/FULL was published on 18 April 2018, and was for a single block of 120 flats (40 x 1 bed and 80 x 2 bed) in 5 storeys, ground floor parking for 96 cars. It was not discussed at any planning meeting, and it was replaced, using the same application number, with a new design. Many of the supporting documents on the planning website were for the original design, it is quite a shambles.

Plan D

This application 18/00519/FULL was refused at the planning meeting on 12th September. It had been changed from the original submission. Erection of one 6 storey and one 7 storey block to provide 158 apartments (142 one bed and 16 two bed) incorporating the construction of a part basement/part elevated car park with car lift to provide 108 car parking spaces, 166 cycle parking spaces.

Plan E 19/01502/Full

This is for two 6 storey blocks of 122 flats (76 one bed and 26 two bed) with 113 parking spaces.

To our mind, this is still totally out of character for the town, but it has been recommended for approval by our lovely Council Planning Department. What is the matter with these people??
The planned meeting on 17th March 2020 was postponed due to the virus epidemic, and re-scheduled to Tuesday 9th June. After a lively on-line meeting, the application was REFUSED.

Plan F 20/00549/OUT.
A 6 storey block which now includes 14 x 2 bed maisonettes on the first 2 floors, 32 x 1bed and 64 x 2 bed flats, 110 flats in total, and 121 parking spaces. Determination deadline is 20 Aug 2020.
They say that they are 'seeking approval for access, appearance, layout and scale only', and apart from a few drawings, all other documents are redacted.

To be discussed at a planning meeting on 2nd March 2021

Please also look at the facegroup Action Against Runwell Towers

Here are a few points:

Parking. Guidelines vary between 1 and 2 car spaces per apartment, but in all of these applications it is very mush below this. There are many words in the document suggesting that this will be sufficient, but it clearly is not. This fact alone should be enough to reject all of the above plans.
Schools. The developers say that with the mainly one bedroom flats there will be no need to provide for extra school places. Really?
Health. in some cases they offer around £60,000 for extra health provision. Hope the new residents keep healthy and look after their teeth.
Affordable Housing. Basildon Council guidelines are for developments of this size to have 15% to 30% affordable housing. But in these cases the developer says this would make the plans financially nonviable, and so they propose to offer up to £650,000 to build these elsewhere. This represents about 3 houses, or 2%. Surely this is not legal, or certainly not morally acceptable.
Retail outlets. Council guidelines are for these blocks not to have flats at ground floor level, and to have retail outlets. But the plan says there is no demand for these in the present climate, so it will not apply.
Cricket ground. The previous plan (Plan C) for 120 flats had proposed £150,000 to the Cricket and Tennis club at the back, to offset overshadowing and to help resurface new courts etc. later plans with more flats and extra height, offer £100,000. But on the positive side, they offer many pages on the danger of residents being hit by cricket balls!
Visual effect. This building would be the first thing car drivers would see on entering Wickford from this side, what an eyesore!
Bedrooms. It has been pointed out that on some of the floor plans the bedrooms have been drawn with single beds, as a double bed would be very tight. This will allow more flats to be squeezed into the building, but what are the implications for future residents?

The planning history of this site, taken from the Council Planning website, is:

04/00604/FULL, 3 storeys, 12 flats, withdrawn
04/01253/FULL, 3 storeys, 12 flats, withdrawn
05/00405/FULL, 4 to 8 storeys, 140 flats, withdrawn
06/00001/FULL, 5 storeys, 84 flats, refused
06/00044/REFUSE, appeal of 06/00001/FULL, allowed (APP/V1505/A/06/2026185)
06/01295/OUT, 83 flats, refused
07/00006/REFUSE, appeal of 06/01295/OUT, withdrawn
18/00519/FULL, 6 and 7 storeys, 185 flats, refused (This application number was re-used for various designs, all published on the site - not sure that was acceptable practice)
19/01502/FULL, 2 x 6 storeys, 122 flats, pending
20/00549/OUT, 6 storeys, 110 flats and 14 maisonettes, pending
20/00024/NONDET, appeal of 20/00549/OUT, appeal valid

Note, the word 'pending' above may mean that the Council's website hasn't been updated.

Hopefully common sense will prevail.....