NEIGHBOURS are furious after Castle Point Council approved plans for two new homes in Benfleet, despite the development breaking its own planning rules.

Construction work to build two three-storey houses in St Mary’s Drive, Benfleet, is set to get underway next week.

Council planning policy states that developments over two storeys high must be built at least three metres away from the site’s boundary and nearby buildings.

However, the two new homes will only be 80cm away from the houses next door – breaking the policy.

The council appears to have got round this by re-labelling the building as a “two-storey building with rooms in the roof”. Residents are furious with the decision to allow the homes to be built.

One neighbour, who did not wish to be named, said: “I am absolutely disgusted with the way this has been handled. I feel completely let down by my local councillor.

“We will have no privacy at all. They will be able to look straight in and the houses are not in style with the area at all.”

Another 60-year-old resident, who again did not want to be named, added: “I have recently retired and was looking forward to enjoying quiet time in my garden, but my privacy will be completely compromised when this goes up.

“It seems as though the council is just changing the goal posts. What worries me is if they can decide not to follow their own rules to meet their own ends, what else might they break the rules for?”

Council officers recommended the plans for approval after re-labelling the building as a “two-storey building with rooms in the roof”.

For developments below two storeys, contractors only have to leave a minimum of a metre’s gap between nearby houses, meaning the homes would only be 20cm short of the restrictions.

Keith Zammit, planning officer for the council, said: “The proposal seeks to provide accommodation over three levels, with the third floor being wholly retained within the proposed roof space.

“In this case the proposed dwellings are essentially two storey in height with the fifth bedroom contained within the roofspace. In effect this replaces the loft. The proposed dwellings would broadly achieve 1m isolation save for the north east corner of plot 2 which would be some 0.8m from the boundary.

“It is not considered that a reason for refusal based on such a marginal deficiency would be supported on appeal particularly in the light of Government guidance to ensure the best use of urban land.

“No objection is therefore raised to the proposal on this basis.”