Anger as homes plan is passed on controversial green belt land

Echo: Independant councillors Doreen Anderson, Neville Watson, Dave Blackwell and John Anderson, who were against the plans 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given to the council in September, and was recommended for refusal by officers as the site was a green belt, and was withdrawn from considering.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)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:27pm Fri 11 Jan 13

upset says...

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.
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. upset
  • Score: 0

6:28pm Fri 11 Jan 13

John T Pharro says...

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.
[quote][p][bold]upset[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]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. John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

6:43pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Antonius says...

"...13 expensive houses.."

Aren't they always ? Never affordable houses.
"...13 expensive houses.." Aren't they always ? Never affordable houses. Antonius
  • Score: 0

6:48pm Fri 11 Jan 13

upset says...

John T Pharro wrote:
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.
It's called democracy John, Just like when Ms Howlett and Co did when she was Mayor.
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]upset[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]It's called democracy John, Just like when Ms Howlett and Co did when she was Mayor. upset
  • Score: 0

7:26pm Fri 11 Jan 13

John T Pharro says...

upset wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
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.
It's called democracy John, Just like when Ms Howlett and Co did when she was Mayor.
Which has nothing to do with this had it? Facts are what I said for this issue. Agree?
[quote][p][bold]upset[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]upset[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]It's called democracy John, Just like when Ms Howlett and Co did when she was Mayor.[/p][/quote]Which has nothing to do with this had it? Facts are what I said for this issue. Agree? John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

8:25pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Audioman says...

Build them BIG they will snaped up
in no time.Should be lots of people after them at any price !!!.
Build them BIG they will snaped up in no time.Should be lots of people after them at any price !!!. Audioman
  • Score: 0

9:10pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Curbishly says...

John T Pharro wrote:
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.
Oh Dear the Buffoon of the Bog is doing his masters bidding.

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.
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]upset[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]Oh Dear the Buffoon of the Bog is doing his masters bidding. 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. Curbishly
  • Score: 0

9:34pm Fri 11 Jan 13

whataday says...

Strange how permission has been given for 13 expensive houses to be built on green belt land Maybe the law abiding locals should as the Dale Farm Travellers how to organise a protest
Strange how permission has been given for 13 expensive houses to be built on green belt land Maybe the law abiding locals should as the Dale Farm Travellers how to organise a protest whataday
  • Score: 0

11:28pm Fri 11 Jan 13

marshman says...

A block of nice flats would have been better.
A block of nice flats would have been better. marshman
  • Score: 0

1:20am Sat 12 Jan 13

Saxonpride says...

Good God, MORE old people complaining?
Good God, MORE old people complaining? Saxonpride
  • Score: 0

2:14am Sat 12 Jan 13

Seasider90 says...

Look if you're cheesed off stand as independent councillors and kick out the idiots who are happy to concrete over our very little remaining green spaces. It's not difficult. Those idiots that are currently in power - make them unemployed at the next election. Its that simple. We have the power to get rid of these toads quite easily and can have the last laugh on them. Remember they rely on the people to stay in power. Kick them out!
Look if you're cheesed off stand as independent councillors and kick out the idiots who are happy to concrete over our very little remaining green spaces. It's not difficult. Those idiots that are currently in power - make them unemployed at the next election. Its that simple. We have the power to get rid of these toads quite easily and can have the last laugh on them. Remember they rely on the people to stay in power. Kick them out! Seasider90
  • Score: 0

11:24am Sat 12 Jan 13

perplexedofSouthend says...

Where's the new SUPER PRISON being built?
Where's the new SUPER PRISON being built? perplexedofSouthend
  • Score: 0

1:18pm Sat 12 Jan 13

upset says...

perplexedofSouthend wrote:
Where's the new SUPER PRISON being built?
Come on Iknowbetter where is it, or is this something you dont know?
God forbid!!!
[quote][p][bold]perplexedofSouthend[/bold] wrote: Where's the new SUPER PRISON being built?[/p][/quote]Come on Iknowbetter where is it, or is this something you dont know? God forbid!!! upset
  • Score: 0

1:41pm Sat 12 Jan 13

John T Pharro says...

Curbishly wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
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.
Oh Dear the Buffoon of the Bog is doing his masters bidding.

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.
And you think hiding behind a soppy name, slinging out insults gives you credibility?
[quote][p][bold]Curbishly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]upset[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]Oh Dear the Buffoon of the Bog is doing his masters bidding. 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.[/p][/quote]And you think hiding behind a soppy name, slinging out insults gives you credibility? John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

4:20pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Carnabackable says...

Antonius wrote:
"...13 expensive houses.."

Aren't they always ? Never affordable houses.
More than affordable to the well orff...
[quote][p][bold]Antonius[/bold] wrote: "...13 expensive houses.." Aren't they always ? Never affordable houses.[/p][/quote]More than affordable to the well orff... Carnabackable
  • Score: 0

4:29pm Sat 12 Jan 13

iknowbetter says...

John T Pharro wrote:
upset wrote:
John T Pharro wrote:
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.
It's called democracy John, Just like when Ms Howlett and Co did when she was Mayor.
Which has nothing to do with this had it? Facts are what I said for this issue. Agree?
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.
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]upset[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]upset[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]It's called democracy John, Just like when Ms Howlett and Co did when she was Mayor.[/p][/quote]Which has nothing to do with this had it? Facts are what I said for this issue. Agree?[/p][/quote]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. iknowbetter
  • Score: 0

10:39pm Sat 12 Jan 13

rogerspaul says...

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
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 rogerspaul
  • Score: 0

10:31am Sun 13 Jan 13

metneyx says...

as someone said above about voting them out,they are all the same. they are government puppets who have no control to change anything as everything is driven by money. nothing will change whoever is in power. they won't be happy until every blade of free grass and trees are torn up and concreted over !they say the land is granted but making the builders build the houses granted is the problem. so once they get granted Green belt they ARE setting more up to be granted in the future. there needs to be some sort of survey to see if people actually need more houses in the area! the whole thing is a farce and the most frustrating thing is it will never change. the only time it will is when there is no more land to build on. and this will be a very sad sad debilitating life to be in.
as someone said above about voting them out,they are all the same. they are government puppets who have no control to change anything as everything is driven by money. nothing will change whoever is in power. they won't be happy until every blade of free grass and trees are torn up and concreted over !they say the land is granted but making the builders build the houses granted is the problem. so once they get granted Green belt they ARE setting more up to be granted in the future. there needs to be some sort of survey to see if people actually need more houses in the area! the whole thing is a farce and the most frustrating thing is it will never change. the only time it will is when there is no more land to build on. and this will be a very sad sad debilitating life to be in. metneyx
  • Score: 0

11:41am Sun 13 Jan 13

Eric Whim says...

rogerspaul wrote:
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
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
[quote][p][bold]rogerspaul[/bold] wrote: 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[/p][/quote]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 Eric Whim
  • Score: 0

12:34pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Eric Whim says...

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
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 Eric Whim
  • Score: 0

5:06pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Lastlaugh... says...

Eric Whim wrote:
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
Well of course they are always singing about treating everyone the same, but when it comes to Travellers the tune soon changes.

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?
[quote][p][bold]Eric Whim[/bold] wrote: 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[/p][/quote]Well of course they are always singing about treating everyone the same, but when it comes to Travellers the tune soon changes. 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? Lastlaugh...
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree