Anger as homes plan is passed on controversial green belt land (From Echo)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting ECHONEWS to 80360, or email us »
Anger as homes plan is passed on controversial green belt land
4:00pm Friday 11th January 2013 in Castle Point
Independant councillors Doreen Anderson, Neville Watson, Dave Blackwell and John Anderson, who were against the plans
Angry residents and councillors fear a ‘hypocritical’ council could set a precedent after allowing homes to be build on a previously protected piece of green belt land.
On Tuesday night, Castle Point Council’s development control committee carried out a u-turn and voted through proposals under ‘special circumstances’ to build 13 expensive homes on Brickfields, in Great Burches Road, Thundersley.
The plan was given to the council in September, and was recommended for refusal by officers as the site was a green belt, and was withdrawn from considering.
Over the next few months, planners at the authority identified nine sites, including Brickfields, as suitable for housing in a bid to encourage development to arrest a chornic shortfall, and the plan for the four to five bedroom homes was passed.
Anne Pope, 55, of Common Approach, Thundersley, said: “The loss of the green belt could set a precedent now which is dangerous.
“Every single application on this patch has been turned down and now for some reason this one has been passed and we can’t understand why."
Jenifer Howlett, of Hermitage Avenue, Thundersley, said: “We fought for years to keep this land.
“I can’t believe the council could be so hypocritical.”
Brentwood-based developers, Stonebound Properties Ltd, who will build the homes, pledged to preserve the area.
Currently, the 13 acre site is home to several dilapidated industrial buildings, surrounded by woodland.
The plans were passed eight votes to four, while Jane King, from the Canvey Island Independent Party, turned up to the meeting late so was exempt from voting and taking part in the discussion.
Brickfields was selected one of several sites for development in the council’s five year housing strategy for Castle Point, but councillors who voted against the plans argued that 13 non-affordable homes would only create a dint in the numbers of homes needed for the area.
John Anderson, from the Canvey Independent Party, said: “I can’t understand what the special circumstances are.
“I fail to see what has changed over the past three months.”
“It’s for 13 four or five bedroom expensive houses and that will not contribute much to the area’s housing need.”
In passing the proposal, councillors said that putting homes on the site would be appropriate.
Speaking during the meeting, councillor Norman Smith, who voted for the homes, said: “It’s a beautiful piece of land that has gone to ruin over the past few years.
“Now this application has come to fruition, I believe we have the opportunity to see this site used in an appriopriate way with four or five bedroom homes.
“To have a high density building on there would be criminal.
“It will preserve the site as it should be preserved and not used as used an industrial unit as it is at the moment.”
Steven Butler, a planning consultant for the joint applicants Stonebound Properites, and Robert Leonard Group, spoke at the meeting to justify the application.
He said: “This provides an opportunity to contribute much needed housing in the borough and we have worked closely with the council to sort out any issues since we last submitted the application.”
The application was initially refused in September, but following the council’s re-think of green belt areas in Castle Point, it was passed last night.
Mr Butler added: “Both the applicants have gone out their way to make sure that the development would be respectful to the surroundings.
“This will be a major enhacement of the site.
“If the application is passed, the applicants will deliver the housing on time and it will make a valuable contribution to the housing need in the borough.”
Comments(21)
John T Pharro
says...
6:28pm Fri 11 Jan 13
upset wrote:Tories all voted for it despite saying they protect the green belt. At least the Councillors you are slagging off (as usual) stuck by their principals and voted against it despite the development being on the mainland.
Obviously there is now a new branch of CIIP in Thundersly or is it just old Labour friends banding together? It's nice to see Ms King has not bought an alarm clock since she left the Tory's still turning up late.
Shame the mainland don't have similar moral Councillors who vote the with their principals isn't it? Comes to something that the mainlanders have to rely on the CIIP to vote the way they feel.
Antonius
says...
6:43pm Fri 11 Jan 13
Aren't they always ? Never affordable houses.
upset
says...
6:48pm Fri 11 Jan 13
John T Pharro wrote:It's called democracy John, Just like when Ms Howlett and Co did when she was Mayor.
upset wrote:Tories all voted for it despite saying they protect the green belt. At least the Councillors you are slagging off (as usual) stuck by their principals and voted against it despite the development being on the mainland.
Obviously there is now a new branch of CIIP in Thundersly or is it just old Labour friends banding together? It's nice to see Ms King has not bought an alarm clock since she left the Tory's still turning up late.
Shame the mainland don't have similar moral Councillors who vote the with their principals isn't it? Comes to something that the mainlanders have to rely on the CIIP to vote the way they feel.
John T Pharro
says...
7:26pm Fri 11 Jan 13
upset wrote:Which has nothing to do with this had it? Facts are what I said for this issue. Agree?
John T Pharro wrote:It's called democracy John, Just like when Ms Howlett and Co did when she was Mayor.
upset wrote:Tories all voted for it despite saying they protect the green belt. At least the Councillors you are slagging off (as usual) stuck by their principals and voted against it despite the development being on the mainland.
Obviously there is now a new branch of CIIP in Thundersly or is it just old Labour friends banding together? It's nice to see Ms King has not bought an alarm clock since she left the Tory's still turning up late.
Shame the mainland don't have similar moral Councillors who vote the with their principals isn't it? Comes to something that the mainlanders have to rely on the CIIP to vote the way they feel.
Audioman
says...
8:25pm Fri 11 Jan 13
in no time.Should be lots of people after them at any price !!!.
Curbishly
says...
9:10pm Fri 11 Jan 13
John T Pharro wrote:Oh Dear the Buffoon of the Bog is doing his masters bidding.
upset wrote:Tories all voted for it despite saying they protect the green belt. At least the Councillors you are slagging off (as usual) stuck by their principals and voted against it despite the development being on the mainland.
Obviously there is now a new branch of CIIP in Thundersly or is it just old Labour friends banding together? It's nice to see Ms King has not bought an alarm clock since she left the Tory's still turning up late.
Shame the mainland don't have similar moral Councillors who vote the with their principals isn't it? Comes to something that the mainlanders have to rely on the CIIP to vote the way they feel.
Whenever the CIIP snap their fingers up trots the buffoon and out comes his tendentious rubbish.
You really are a silly little man.
And no I do not want to debate with you for simple reason you are a fool and have no credibility.
whataday
says...
9:34pm Fri 11 Jan 13
marshman
says...
11:28pm Fri 11 Jan 13
Saxonpride
says...
1:20am Sat 12 Jan 13
Seasider90
says...
2:14am Sat 12 Jan 13
perplexedofSouthend
says...
11:24am Sat 12 Jan 13
upset
says...
1:18pm Sat 12 Jan 13
perplexedofSouthend wrote:Come on Iknowbetter where is it, or is this something you dont know?
Where's the new SUPER PRISON being built?
God forbid!!!
John T Pharro
says...
1:41pm Sat 12 Jan 13
Curbishly wrote:And you think hiding behind a soppy name, slinging out insults gives you credibility?
John T Pharro wrote:Oh Dear the Buffoon of the Bog is doing his masters bidding.
upset wrote:Tories all voted for it despite saying they protect the green belt. At least the Councillors you are slagging off (as usual) stuck by their principals and voted against it despite the development being on the mainland.
Obviously there is now a new branch of CIIP in Thundersly or is it just old Labour friends banding together? It's nice to see Ms King has not bought an alarm clock since she left the Tory's still turning up late.
Shame the mainland don't have similar moral Councillors who vote the with their principals isn't it? Comes to something that the mainlanders have to rely on the CIIP to vote the way they feel.
Whenever the CIIP snap their fingers up trots the buffoon and out comes his tendentious rubbish.
You really are a silly little man.
And no I do not want to debate with you for simple reason you are a fool and have no credibility.
Carnabackable
says...
4:20pm Sat 12 Jan 13
Antonius wrote:More than affordable to the well orff...
"...13 expensive houses.."
Aren't they always ? Never affordable houses.
iknowbetter
says...
4:29pm Sat 12 Jan 13
John T Pharro wrote:Come on John you have used the word "fact" in your sentence, that is something Upset dosnt understand in her dull and pointless little world, thought you would have realised by now.
upset wrote:Which has nothing to do with this had it? Facts are what I said for this issue. Agree?John T Pharro wrote:It's called democracy John, Just like when Ms Howlett and Co did when she was Mayor.upset wrote: Obviously there is now a new branch of CIIP in Thundersly or is it just old Labour friends banding together? It's nice to see Ms King has not bought an alarm clock since she left the Tory's still turning up late.Tories all voted for it despite saying they protect the green belt. At least the Councillors you are slagging off (as usual) stuck by their principals and voted against it despite the development being on the mainland. Shame the mainland don't have similar moral Councillors who vote the with their principals isn't it? Comes to something that the mainlanders have to rely on the CIIP to vote the way they feel.
rogerspaul
says...
10:39pm Sat 12 Jan 13
metneyx
says...
10:31am Sun 13 Jan 13
Eric Whim
says...
11:41am Sun 13 Jan 13
rogerspaul wrote:Councils aren't worried about protected species like bats and badgers when they stand in the way of development, they;ll just bulldoze away regardless
whats going to happen to the 4 small company's that have been there for over 10 years and have always pay there council taxes with out a moan,and where are the badger's. bat's and the owl going to live perhaps in one of there annex
Eric Whim
says...
12:34pm Tue 15 Jan 13
http://www.echo-news
.co.uk/news/local_ne
ws/castlepoint/10160
679.Travellers_appea
l_greenbelt_planning
_decision/
although here, I'm sure the NIMBY vote will win hands down
Lastlaugh...
says...
5:06pm Wed 16 Jan 13
Eric Whim wrote:Well of course they are always singing about treating everyone the same, but when it comes to Travellers the tune soon changes.
now they've decided to further plunder green belt land and grant permission to this mob how about doing the same for another lot
http://www.echo-news
.co.uk/news/local_ne
ws/castlepoint/10160
679.Travellers_appea
l_greenbelt_planning
_decision/
although here, I'm sure the NIMBY vote will win hands down
There will come a time when Travellers looking to live on their own land will be the least of the problems faced by this country and the people...
Would it be churlish to wish for those times to arrive asap?
upset says...
5:27pm Fri 11 Jan 13