Canvey Residents, Local Plan 4,000 new Dwellings! A Must Attend Meeting, for US All! Make Your Councillor Aware of your feelings! Think the Paddocks and Jellicoe are bad, you wait until this Plan is implemented! Another fine Mess we are Left In!

Canvey Islanders, this time next week our Fate will have been decided!

A meeting to consider the CPBC Local Plan 2018 with sites identified for 4,000* new dwellings, and the release of vast tracts of Green Belt and green field sites will have been held and a decision made!

Benfleet Residents will be mobilised to attend the meeting on the 28th November to influence their councillors.

Canvey Island Residents should be prepared to do the same!

Details of the meeting are below.

Cllr Smith and the Chief Executive of CPBC will be giving the Green Light to developers in areas such as the Dutch Village cornfields, the Triangle, the Paddocks, Thorney Bay and Jotmans farm!

This decision will have a fundamental affect on our daily lives if allowed to happen!

Whether your current concerns are the daily Traffic Congestion, the removal of the Rapid Response Vehicle, the NHS “reorganisation” in our area, access to Doctors, Schools, the loss of Green Fields, Flooding of our Homes, be certain that if our Councillors vote to Approve the Local Plan as it stands, these issues will intensify!

We must Urge our Councillors to actively Vote Against this Local Plan, even if Intervention is the only option.

As it was explained in the previous POST the threat of Intervention may not be quite as bad as portrayed by cllr smith and ceo marchant. Certainly the removal of local input, was exaggerated.

Back in June Castle Point councillors were threatened by the effects of Intervention and the benefits of CPBC retaining control of the Local Plan;

By the cpbc ceo: with intervention “Council with no say over Plan making locally, and no influence over the outcome”

By Cllr smith said: “keeping the plan making process in members control is of paramount importance for cllrs and residents to keep control of the shaping of our future Borough.” “Green Belt assessment a set process and promised member involvement in that process.

“By cllr Stanley: “give confidence to the gov minister that he can leave the job safely in our hands.”

I wonder how worse it could have been?

We must Urge our Councillors to actively Vote Against this Local Plan, even if Intervention is the only option.

Part of the Local Plan is to consider Constraints against development. Across the Borough Green Belt is a major Policy Constraint against development.

On Canvey Island, in particular, a second major Constraint is Flood Risk. CPBC have consistently used Flood Risk as a Constraint against development Housing Numbers across the Borough.

Where Flood Risk actually threatens, on Canvey Island, the Constraint is Not applied to development. In effect the Borough Housing Supply Numbers are reduced, but not on Canvey Island specifically.

We must Urge our Councillors to actively Vote Against this Local Plan, even if Intervention is the only option.

The population of Castle Point increased over the previous Census Period 2001 -2011 by just 1.6%.

However, the distribution of this increase is interesting, Canvey Island, where Flood Risk is an Actual Threat, was 2.6% up, whilst the Mainland saw just a 0.8% increase!

We covered this in more detail HERE.

We must Urge our Councillors to actively Vote Against this Local Plan, even if Intervention is the only option.

With the development of Jotmans Farm, of 900 dwellings, comes a Link Road, wait for it, ONTO CANVEY WAY !

The intention is to form a junction from west Benfleet to meet Canvey Way halfway along.

Canvey Island Commuters will only have to envisage the effects of traffic having priority from the right at junctions to imagine how this will effect the Island!

It is clear this Local Plan 2018 is a Bad Plan.

We must Urge our Councillors to actively Vote Against this Local Plan, even if Intervention is the only option.

At least the possibility of a Neutral view on development distribution may be applied, rather than this biased version!

A list of our CPBC councillors contact details can be found HERE.

The Local Plan meeting to decide where and when development across Canvey Island will take place Wednesday 28th November start 7.30pm at Council Chamber, Kiln Road, Thundersley, Benfleet, Essex, SS7 1TF.

*mainland residents group claim.

Like a bad Smell, this just will not Go Away!


Letter from the Ministry. Intervention and the Castle Point Local Plan – have Councillors been duped? Perhaps this Letter warrants a read before they decide!

So, just how Scarey, would Government Intervention in the Castle Point Local Plan, actually be?
Cllr Smith and the cpbc chief executive paint the move by Government as being close to an Armageddon for the Borough!

The latest word from the Mainland is that 400 new Houses will be built in Castle Point, every year of the new Local Plan2018!

This contrasts to the 2014 Local Plan, on which cpbc officers felt confident that 200 dwellings per Annum, would be an acceptable number of new houses.

You will be aware that cpbc councillors, voted down that version of the Local Plan in protest that the 200 dwellings was too high a number!
Now, just 4 years later CPBC have fallen foul of the Duty to Cooperate requirement, had the 2016 Plan Withdrawn, received a warning Letter from the Government’s Secretary of State, and been offered the option of facing Government Intervention or adopt a strict schedule to produce a Local Plan2018 supposedly under the evil eye of the Government Chief Planner.

The cpbc chief executive informed councillors that under Intervention, there would be no Input from our elected councillors!

This is strange. I contacted the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, to clarify if local input was definitely excluded, as the cpbc chief executive had informed.

The response, perhaps councillors should bother to read and then question, is below!

Screenshot (21)_LIStrange what you can learn, by asking a question!

How NOT to Build Cross Community Consensus, the Castle Point Way! A Joint meeting with Canvey and Mainland Residents apparently “Not Effective”!

Embracing the spirit of localism, a small contingency of Canvey Island and Benfleet community representatives, collectively requested an opportunity to discuss their Development concerns, with Castle Point Council leader, Cllr Smith.


Residents having recognised that the loss of Castle Point Green Belt sites, that are in close proximity, will have a cumulative impact on the local environment.

Unfortunately, seemingly wishing to avoid a combined group meeting, made up of the Dutch Village and Jotmans Farm Green Belt sites campaigners, the leader of CPBC, succeeds in promoting the perception, that communities from Canvey Island and Benfleet are being kept separate for an ulterior motive!

Local communities in this part of the Borough are clearly best placed to recognise that local and main roads are struggling to cope with the demands of today’s traffic, let alone the additional traffic brought about by the proposed large scale indiscriminate development.

The same communities are also best placed to understand how their health and wellbeing issues are directly linked to road traffic pollution and how their day to day functional requirements are already overstretched.
It was not unreasonable of us, to seek an open forum with cllr Smith, so as not to allow local campaigners to meet the leader in more “private” circumstances.

It may appear advantageous for residents with localised green belt site interests, seemingly at risk of development through the new Local Plan, to engage with cllr Smith via individual one to one meetings, however this may encourage the return to the problematic Local Factoring, that has blighted and festered mistrust, through previous versions of the CPBC Local Plan!

Having rejected the opportunity of bringing the community of Castle Point together, Cllr Smith has disingenuously failed to meet his communities public consultation expectations.

CPBC recognises that one of the key risks to the successful production of its Local Plan and its Policies is the possibility it would attract significant public opposition. This particular threat level has been scaled as “HIGH”, and mitigation measures were needed, in the face of Residents opposition to the Local Plan, to prevent slippage in the programmed time scale, raising the perceived Fear of Government Intervention.

CPBCs documented that:-
“The Local Plan will tackle contentious issues that could give rise to significant public opposition. Whilst every effort will be made to build cross community consensus, there remains risk of significant public opposition to the Local Plan proposals”

Cllr Smiths determination to meet with individual Green Belt groups in isolation contradicts this commitment.

Remember, Remember, the 28th of November! Intervention and Plot, Canvey and the mainland set to lose tracts of Green Belt!

This month, Canvey Island and Castle Point Borough Council face the prospect of Government Intervention, over the local authority’s Local Plan!

This Plan, to be voted on by local councillors on the 28th November in the council chamber Runnymede is Crucial to where between 4,000 – 5800 new houses will be allocated.

Should the Councillors refuse to Approve a new Local Plan identifying sites to accommodate these numbers the Government will step in and select the sites.

Those councillors that oppose Government Intervention, but support Green Belt protection, will have a dilemma come the vote.

CPBC chief executive will stress how worse it would be via intervention.

Councillors must ask themselves, could it have been any worse than what the proposed Plan is, anyway?

Either way they have, apparently, no input!

Previously the cpbc chief executive issued the warning to councillors that Intervention will be a catastrophe of seismic proportion for Castle Point Council.

Councillors themselves, chiefly the Lead Group, voted to trust the council leader and senior officers to chose development sites, including apparently precious Green Belt, and produce a Local Plan.

Now we learn that development is coming to many parts of the Borough!

Will Councillors and Residents give up the Fight

All I can say is,

“what were they thinking”?


Runnymede Towers

Canvey Island’s Dutch Village Green Belt Development, Persimmons approach the 2nd Hurdle, with just one faller at the 1st!

Persimmon have big Housing Development plans for Canvey Island Green Belt.

However they appear happy to play the Long Game, as they again propose a Stable Block for Horses on the Dutch Village Green Belt on the Cornfields, as their first stage approach to their aims.

Note the new Application number should you care to object.

Green Belt. Land East of Canvey Road Application No. 18/0980/FUL | Erection of stable block with adjoining hay storage/tack room and associated landscaping, formation of access track together with the change of use of land for the keeping of horses, installation of a width restriction barrier to discourage unauthorised motorcycle access and main entrance gate alterations | Land East Of Canvey Road And South Of Great Russell Head Farm Canvey Island Essex

This will include the “Change of Use of Land” as it is Green Belt.
Their Application stresses the stables will be “Built Development”.

Those wishing to object to the application, can do so on the CPBC website.

The relevant page can be found HERE.

For those concerned or wishing to make comment we thought it might be helpful to make public our Grounds for Objection as registered with Castle Point Council, these follow below for you to see, feel free to cherry pick to add to your objections:-

This Proposal for Stables, also more importantly, includes the change of Use of Land.
Therefore, as a whole, it should be considered that the proposal represents inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The NPPF identifies that such development may only be permitted under Very Special Circumstances.

NPPF Paragraph 83 instructs “Once established, Green Belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances, through the preparation or review of the Local Plan.” It can be argued that the “Change of Use of Land” should also only be considered, through the preparation or review of the Local Plan rather than by individual applications.
“All permanent stables and field shelters will require planning permission and, if the land is not in use for the keeping of horses, an application is unlikely to be acceptable.”

The Land has not been used, and is not used, for the keeping of horses. No permanent stables have been erected in the past.
The current security of the site actively discourages and prevents horses from having easy access to the fields.
As CPBC have recognised that a similar Application, 16/0433/FUL, required Very Special Circumstances, despite a Change of Use of Land NOT being necessary to be applied for.

The term Very Special Circumstances implies that a desperate “Need” for this facility must be Obvious and Proven, or that there are very few similar facilities in the area.

It should be noted that there are many similar facilities in the local area.
Most notable of which are the Approved Application for livery, stabling and 2 ménages at Sluice Farm, Haven Road, Canvey Island.
Approval for this considerable facility, Proposal 16/0433/FUL, for stables for 40 horses, was granted by Castle Point Borough Council as recently as 10th January 2017.

Also the long established nearby facilities at Northwick Poultry Farm x 2 yards, Northwick Road Canvey Island.
The Applicant states that “facilities are small scale” indeed accommodating a maximum of 2 horses only. This will have no tangible impact on any suggested unmet need for such facilities, even if such need were proven to exist.

In the light of these points raised, the Very Special Circumstances necessary cannot be considered to have been fulfilled.

Green Belt

Whilst CPBC will be reminded that they are expected to consider only the Application for stables etc, it must be noted that the Applicant themselves goes to repeated lengths to emphasise “of course, as a matter of fact, the construction of such buildings in the Green Belt will give rise to built development upon it” as though some precursor to other types of more extensive development, they being Housing Developers.

The applicant points out “To the south is an extensive area of unmaintained scrubland which separates the site from the residential area to the south (Holland Avenue). This extensive area of scrub would preclude views of the stables from the residential area to the south. It is considered that the development would have no perceivable impact on Green Belt openness when viewed from the residential area to the south.”

This is presuming that this currently unmaintained area will remain so. This should not be assumed, as the area in its present unmaintained condition can be considered a very potential fire hazard to the houses along Holland Avenue. The area of scrubland has been allowed to grow high and against the rear garden fences of Holland Avenue and it would be reasonable to expect that these bushes and brambles should be cleared, thus removing the fire hazard.
Therefore this area of scrub cannot be considered a permanent feature and that the stable block and yard, a permanent Built feature, would then be compromising and impacting upon the Openess of the Green Belt.

The applicant refers to the Purposes of the Green Belt and notes ‘to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas’;5 By the applicant pointing out that their intention is to construct “buildings in the Green Belt will give rise to built development” they are in effect conceding that they would be harming the Green Belt by means of commencing Sprawl And beginning Encroachment into the countryside adjoining this largely built up area.

Archaeological Features

The Design document indicates that there would be no hard fencing restricting the movement of Horses outside of the Stable Yard.
The field abutting the proposed Stable Yard contains the Roman Saltern, a scheduled Ancient Monument, 260m south east of Great Russell Head Farm. This monument is scheduled under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 as amended as it appears to the Secretary of State to be of national importance.

Applicants Design and Access Statement
This field, being the least low-lying, is the driest of the 4 fields making up the site during the wet winter months, whilst much of the other 3 fields remain heavily water-logged during this period.
The temptation to use the field containing the Roman Saltern during wet periods to allow “turning out” or exercise may well lead to potential damage of the archaeological feature and any historical artefacts below ground.
“The use of mobile, temporary horse fencing would allow ‘paddock’ areas to be formed for the grazing / exercising of the horses.”

The potential therefore exists for these fences to be knocked down whether by deliberate or accidental means, allowing horses to escape their confines, and / or riders to be unaware or careless and ride across and around the scheduled Ancient Monument Site.
Therefore the development will most likely lead to an adverse impact on the archaeological features close by.

Proposed Access
The Applicant is wrong, and it is misleading to suggest that; “The site currently benefits from a lawful access from Canvey Way.”

The current access is on a busy dual carriageway, Canvey Road. This is towards the end of a 50 mph stretch leading from Waterside Roundabout on which speeds of up to 70mph are not unusual! The access gate is directly ahead of the road as it curves into the approach to the Canvey Road / Roscommon Way roundabout.

The design plans indicate the intention to “set back” the gated entrance 6 metres from the footpath. Whilst this “pull in” may make the actual entry to the field somewhat safer, other Canvey Road field entrances, with similar “pull in”design, have been the subject of serious “Fly Tipping” problems. This has been notably recorded at the entrances to the Canvey West Marsh RSPB site, directly opposite.
The only solution to this Fly Tipping problem the RSPB have found, is to re-position the gates directly close to Canvey Road, the exact opposite of the Applicants Planning Proposal’s intentions.

The use of Canvey Road is planned to become busier, given the planned extension to Charfleets Industrial Estate and the approved Business / Retail Parks, increasing the private vehicle and heavy commercial vehicle use, adding to the potential hazards.
The assessed 6 vehicle movements per day for the proposed site, whilst few, will likely be during the most busy periods of the day, during the early morning commute and the start of the evening Rush Hour.


7 Design and Access Statement 6.12 and 6.13 with accompanying photograph 8 “ “ 6.2, 6.7, 8.8, 9.5
In the event of a Fire in the Stable Block, the Applicants submitted Stable Entrance Plan drawing, appears to indicate an inadequate entrance width for the Fire Service Pumps. The minimum requirement indicated in the London Fire Service document “Fire Service Guidance Note” GN29, between Gateways, is 3.1 metres. Whilst the Applicants Drawing gives no measurement figures, the width restriction appears to be no more than 3.0 metres wide.

The access would prove a very tight “turn-in” for a Fire Service pump, and mean blocking Canvey Road should the gate be locked, whilst access is gained.
Currently the field gate is locked and historically when fires have “broken out” or been started in the field proposed for the Stable Block or an adjacent field, the fire Service pump has had serious issues gaining access, due to the narrow locked gate and the general ground conditions.
The proposed entrance, given its position and layout, must be considered a critical feature and unsuitable for purpose.


The proposed site for the Stable block is very close to Canvey Road pedestrian pavement, adjacent to the “old” original Canvey Road, thereby hidden from view of vehicles passing by.
The RSPB site and West Canvey Marsh opposite have suffered from vandalism.

The Stable Block would likely act as a “magnet” for vandals being, unlit, housing unattended animals over night, out of sight of passers-by view thereby “secret”, and of wooden construction, containing feed and bedding, all potential fire hazards.
Historically young children “play” in the field, making dens etc, directly behind the gardens of Holland Avenue. Occasionally attempts are made to light fires but in the main residents are aware of the activity and are able to take preventative measures.
Older generation of youngsters are responsible for the sporadic more serious fire starting on other parts of the land, that takes place usually over the course of the summer months, and causes the Fire Service to attend.
The potential for harm to animals, damage to the facility and creating a more serious fire, with more serious consequences, close to the scrub field directly behind the Stable Block, to the south, should not be dismissed.

At 6.9 of the Design and Access Statement, and to conform to cpbc officer requests, a width restriction gate is proposed to discourage unauthorised Motor cyclists. Whilst this would not be unwelcome, it must be acknowledged that this form of nuisance does not amount to the problem that it once was.

In the event of the Fire Service and Ambulance service vehicles requiring to attend the site in an Emergency, during the wet winter months, the poorly drained and waterlogged fields may well present a serious problem for the vehicles traction.
Impact on the Neighbourhood.

The intention is to use the created horse manure as agricultural fertiliser. This is usually created by allowing the horse manure to rot down on site.
The rear gardens of Holland Avenue, being just 70 metres away will most likely be affected by the smells emitting, especially during the warmer months when residents will expect to be able to leave windows and doors open to enjoy the fresh air, but would likely be prevented from doing so.

1998 Adopted Local Plan
RE11 (iii) BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE RESIDENTIAL AMENITIES OF NEARBY PROPERTIES BY VIRTUE OF NOISE, SMELL OR GENERAL DISTURBANCE. (my emphasis) And further; “would be likely to cause danger to other road users” by means of unsuitable entry access.

IMG_0156 (2)

Castle Point Local Plan clear hints that Green Belt and Greenfield Land to be sacrificed! Household Projection and Development Delivery doubts mean it’s time for local MP’s involvement?

The Outlook is Bleak for Canvey Island and Castle Point residents, regarding the levels and locations of the raft of new development, both Housing and Business, planned for the borough!

Conversations between “informed contacts” over the Local Plan have confirmed an extremely pessimistic outlook, especially where Green Belt, safety, commuting, policing, health services and general Infrastructure is concerned!

The likely proposed Housing Need numbers will propose eating into the Green Belt and green fields. This will quite rightly raise residents concerns and focus thoughts as to whose Housing Needs are being fulfilled.

this especially following the latest Household Growth Projections being lower than previously estimated. The most recent effect of this has prompted the North Herts local authority to revisit their Housing Need projections at the behest of the Local Plan examining Inspector!

The latest housing projection figures have emerged as being significantly lower than the proposed number of homes to be built in the North Hertfordshire Local Plan, with the district council criticised for “sweeping the numbers under the carpet”. Article may be viewed HERE.

The question raised is whether the substance of the Government’s drive for 300,000 new builds per annum, is to match actual Housing Need, or to fulfil an aspiration.

In the case of the North Herts Local Plan the Inspector has suggested that the LA’s Housing target should be revisited despite the suggestion the Housing Minister, having commented on the general subject;

Kit Malthouse acknowledged the impact of this (Household Projection levels being lower), and advised plan-making authorities should not “take their foot off the accelerator”

Surely if the Policy of Green Belt and its permanence, plus other accepted physical Constraints are to have any Credibility at all, an aspirational drive for a Housing Target that is beyond Need should be challenged.

Is this not time for our MP Rebecca Harris, to not be asking and providing answers ahead of the Castle Point “Special Council” meeting, part of the rigid Government Timetable set only to avoid Intervention?

A Local Plan solely drawn up to a rigid Timetable, rather than being supported by the latest Evidence Base documentation, Risks being found Unsound!

“In July 2017, the Leaders and Chief Executives of the South Essex Authorities (Basildon, Brentwood, Castle Point, Rochford, Southend-on-Sea, Thurrock and Essex County Council) initiated an approach of collaboration to develop a long-term place-based growth ambition.
South Essex Joint Strategic Plan.

It is set to deliver a minimum of 90,000 new homes and 52,000 new jobs by 2038.”

Note the date July 2018, well ahead of Household Projection changes, Castle Point leader and ceo, have fully engaged on behalf of Castle Point in this venture, that has also set Housing Figures ahead of the Household Projections, knowing full well that we will not see Highway Infrastructure improvements in the Borough.

Whilst, the 3rd quarter 2018 New House Builds numbers are 15% up on last year, much of this may be influenced by Housing Association involvement in large projects.

Housing associations are involved in a number of big London developments, including Swan Housing Association’s £300m project in Poplar with 1,500 planned homes, half of which are slated as affordable.
Developer Countryside Properties and London & Quadrant (L&Q) Housing Trust have teamed up to redevelop the former Ford factory site in Dagenham with up to 3,000 homes, half of them affordable. Housing associations also play a big part in the north-west of England, where L&Q has gone into partnership with Trafford Housing Trust in Manchester.
Full report HERE.

Castle Point appears to hold more appeal to developers of Market Priced Housing, rather than Affordable builds.

Generally speaking the target of 300,000* new builds per Annum, apart from being an unsubstantiated target, also appears to be out of reach, at least for this year. Whether this is down to the economic background, especially where the current high deposit required for a mortgage is concerned, or the doubts over the Building Industry workforce in the uncertainty over Brexit**, is concerned should not influence to great an extent, the cpbc Local Plan.

What must be considered is how will releasing Green Field land affect the Borough without improved Infrastructure first, as we were promised.

CPBC leader cllr smith said;

Any development has to have infrastructure and that is the whole point of us having control of our plan. All of these issues will be taken into account, when we put forward our plan.” “Roads and the number of homes built are being considered because if we do not do something about it now, the Government will.”

Now it appears, following feedback, there may be little gained by Castle Point Borough council avoiding Intervention!


  • More about falling short of the 300,000 target by 50,000 HERE
  • More on Brexit and Building workforce HERE



Canvey Island in the lap of the Gods, otherwise known as Castle Point Council Leader and CEO! Better for CPBC to Control the Destiny of Canvey Green Belt, or the Government Chief Planner?

Canvey Island and Castle Point residents should be concerned to know that in exactly 4 weeks time, to the day, we will learn whether the desperate attempts by our councillors, and professional officers, to avoid Government Intervention over the debacle of the cpbc Local Plan has been worthwhile.

We were told that Intervention, “Takes away the ability for us (cpbc) to control the destiny of land in the Borough for our residents”

Previously in the Local Plan process Canvey Island was the ONLY area within the Borough that these, mainly, same councillors could agree to the release of Green Belt land for development, during the whole Plan period!

Obviously the Inspector rejected this idea, stating quite clearly “some development at Canvey Island may be required to meet local need”.

Plain to see then, that the level of land needed for Housing Development on Canvey Island, did NOT require the release of Green Belt!

BUT NO, cpbc chief executive, in his infinite wisdom, thought the opposite, and further proposed that, Canvey Island Green Belt, should remain the single area forming the nucleus of the Green Belt Housing Growth in the Borough’s Local Plan, whilst adding the mainland Green Belt sites for the 2014 version.

This belying the Inspector’s clear intentions, contained within his critical letter, addressed to cpbc Head of Regeneration & Neighbourhoods, strongly suggesting the Withdrawal of the Core Strategy plan!

Canvey Green Belt was only removed, gratefully, from the 2016 version of the cpbc Local Plan’s Housing growth sites, to add support to the politically driven protection granted to, selected sites identified as, “virgin” Green Belt land.

Now we have just 4 weeks to wait to learn how, and why, the Local Plan process, is better in the hands of our local councillors, rather than the government Intervention team.

In CPBC’s own words; “the Secretary of State wrote again to the Borough Council in March 2018, indicating that he was minded to continue with intervention since there was no clear timetable for preparing and adopting a local plan for the Borough.”

“Intervention by Government in any area of local government business is a last resort and follows poor decision making and failure to follow Government direction and advice.
Members of the Council will not be involved and will be excluded from the plan making process.
In terms of decision-taking, the Government will wish to make certain after intervention that the statutory development plan and policies for the Borough will be implemented and will not allow the local plan once agreed to be frustrated by the Development Control process.”

“As one of the very few planning authorities under intense scrutiny by MHCLG, (ministry of housing community and local government,) the Council remains at great risk of intervention and this will lead to considerable reputational damage on a national scale. This may cause other non-intended consequences such as the inability to attract staff”

The mood of Residents, particularly mainlanders, suggest that only if substantial Green Belt is protected from development, will it have been worthwhile staving off Intervention.

Canvey Residents can be sure that the extra Constraints that should have been applied to Canvey Island in isolation, would ONLY have been applied correctly by Government officials. History has proven that lead group councillors, in collusion with certain officers, have only sought to use these Canvey Constraints, to lower the OVERALL Housing Supply figures ACROSS of the whole Castle Point area!

In effect cementing the lead group’s controlling status quo in the follow up local election by quelling the mainland unrest by removing the contentious Green Belt sites from the 2016 local plan.

Look also at similar protectionist decision-making at Brentwood council, with their plan to develop a Garden Village at Dunton.

Note also the effects the Brentwood plans will have on Castle Point residents, with the amount of proposed housing development alongside the main A127 commuter route adding to the Basildon planned development.

Divided by the A127, Dunton Hills Garden Village will have little or no impact upon Brentwood. Those of us living south of the A127, especially in Castle Point and Basildon, will bear the brunt of the strain on infrastructure and commuting issues.

Dunton Hills Garden Village, which Brentwood Borough Council says could initially deliver about 2,500 homes, with the potential for another 1,500, has come under the most fierce criticism from Thurrock Council, that along with Basildon, borders the borough close to where the development would be built on 260 hectares of land south of the A127. *
Brentwood Borough Council is meeting on Thursday, November 8, at the Brentwood Centre to discuss the next stage of the borough’s Local Plan – principally how and where to cater for the 7,752 new homes the borough needs to find between 2016 and 2033. (
*wasn’t we informed by cpbc that in the case of a Garden Village proposal at the Blinking Owl site, North Thundersley, that 8,000 dwellings would be needed to make the installation of infrastructure financially viable?

Look at these statistics, area, population etc and judge whether there is a balance of growth distribution across ours and Brentwood boroughs.

Brentwood: Area: 153.1 km², Population 73,600 (2011). 7,752 new homes.
Castle Point: Area 45.08 km, Population 88,011 (2011). new homes tbd (see below)

The expectation, is for cpbc to capitulate to the Government Chief Planner, and reintroduce the 2014 daft Local Plan with these implications for us;

The council has identified 13 locations for housing development, with 4,000 more homes required in the period to 2031 to meet growing demands of our community. This means around 200 new homes a year would be built across the whole borough. Without the plan, it is feared that there would have to be at least 7,000 more homes.

Don’t forget that the cpbc lead group and some independent councillors, agreed this daft Plan. Only under the threat of a Mainland residents backlash at the Polling Station, was this Plan rejected!

Below are Maps of the Brentwood and Thurrock boroughs, the implications on Canvey Island and Castle Point, by the population and Industrial growths of these two neighbouring areas, can be easily imagined if complimented by similar growth in Castle Point!

What of cpbc leader’s promise of infrastructure before development? With growth in the neighbouring areas and no realistic likelihood of Highway improvements, new access to Canvey, dualling of Canvey Way, Somnes Avenue widening, Roscommon Way completion etc, the likely announcement of many large developments sites bodes ill for Canvey Island!

Castle Point Residents will be eager to learn, the benefits of “control of the destiny of land in the Borough for our residents”, over the dreaded Government Intervention!

Screenshot (18)

Screenshot (19)