Southend residents must scream their voices to fever pitch to Save Bournes Green Chase Green Belt Land from the Labour-led administration’s plans to raise it to the ground and build 10,000 homes

James Miller
2 hours ago
5 min read

The expression of interest from the Labour, Liberal Democrat and Independent Group to build 10,000 homes on Green Belt land near Bournes Green Chase has ignited much anger right across Southend.

And considering these homes aren’t even included in Southend’s made-up-out-of-thin-air government targets of 23,000 new homes, it begs the question, why would they do this?

They submitted their expression of interest under the guise of “infrastructure first”, but we know that’s never going to happen because we don’t have the right infrastructure now. And what makes them think developers will invest if they have to contribute to paying for new hospitals and schools? That’s aside from the 50% affordable housing quota required of developers if Green Belt is to be flattened, as set out in the National Policy Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) - the overarching guide for planning in the country that defines what Local Planning Authorities can do. Rarely does a developer fulfil any affordable housing quotas already. We know they constantly loophole their way out of this obligation where they cite financial unviability after gaining the planning permission. Look at what Bellway are doing in the flood plain development in Shoebury.

Do the council have the power to stop this?

It cannot be reiterated enough that the NPPF sets out the rules of play for local authorities and they are very specific about the restrictions on Green Belt.

I was quite buoyed by the document in fact and would recommend all who are interested in saving the Green Belt to read it. The protections are strong and they most certainly confirm that Local Authorities are the primary arbitrators of Green Belt land - which is in stark contrast to Cllr Daniel Cowan's position (Labour Leader of Southend City Council) who claims that if they don’t press forward with this plan then developers will do it anyway and Southend’s infrastructure will not be protected.

To confirm: the NPPF states ”when considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.”

But don’t take my word for it. I wrote to both the Planning Inspectorate and the Rt Hon Angela Rayner, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, who came back to me with the following:

Presuming you made your way through both correspondence, you will now know the Cllr Cowan's administration not only have the power to stop this, never did they have to register their expression of interest.

So what if we said no?

Let’s imagine our council took the opposite position and defended our land as most residents would wish and, firstly, didn’t submit their own expression of interest, but secondly, refused all further planning permissions. The developer could then appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and they would make their assessment. In some circumstances the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing, and Communities might even “call in” the application to take personal responsibility for the decision. But crucially, they must follow the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which sets strict “golden rules” for Green Belt development.

Reading the NPPF closely, it is clear to me that a proposal like this should fail almost all the guidance and that Southend Council would have a strong case in a judicial review. It would fail on the grounds of:

Lack of housing need (there are 1,500 waiting for housing in Southend - not 10,000)
Already available brownfield sites
Already available empty properties
Impact on sustainability
Harm to wildlife and an adverse effect on biodiversity
Harm to health in regard to air quality via thousands of new cars to the town (bear in mind this administration declared a “Climate Emergency”! - how does that marry up?)
Harm to residents through lack of infrastructure

So I say let any developer appeal at their own time and cost.

Let the planning inspectorate venture to our little town to discover for themselves just how little room we have left.

Let the Rt Hon Angela Rayner MP introduce herself to Southend and tell us just how much she is right and we are wrong.

And let us have our day in court. Better this than offering our land on a plate!

What can we do?

The legal power of large numbers of residents writing in to object cannot be underestimated.

Strong public opposition can influence decisions, support legal challenges, and make it harder for developers or government to ignore local views.

Bottom line: The more residents sign the petition set up by Cllr Tony Cox (see Appendix 1) and write to their ward councillors and MPs (see Appendix 2) the harder it will be to ignore local opposition and the greater the chance of protecting our precious Green Belt land.

You can find the cross-party campaign started by Cllr James Moyies where the Southend Conservatives, Southend Greens, Southend Confelicity, Southend Reform and the non-aligned Independents are all supported by the Shoeburyness Residents’ Association and the East Beach Residents' Association: https://saveourgreenbelt.org. We must have more resident associations join.

You can join the Facebook group “Save Bournes Green Chase Green Belt Land”, where we are hoping this may become a central hub for Southend residents to mobilise our efforts: Save Bournes Green Chase Green Belt Land | Facebook. Our first act has been to arrange a protest on Sunday, June 8th from 1pm to 3pm by Bournes Green Chase, which we will need the biggest crowd possible - it’s a numbers game so please come if only for a short while.

More importantly than anything, watch out for the public consultation that runs from June to September and sign everything you can to say stop it!

Finally, Southend-on-Sea Council works for residents—not Westminster or developers. If they give up our Green Belt without clear public backing, they must be held accountable.

Hopefully there will be elections in 2026 and we can vote all those who want to rip up the Green Belt out. In the meantime I urge to join the cause and help stop this any way you feel you can.

Reference