SOUTHEND Council commissioned a design company to draw up plans for housing developments on ten council-owned sites - including three major car parks, it has been revealed.

Details of the potential housing sites were posted on the website of Troy Planning and Design on Thursday, and indicated the Gas Works car park on the seafront, as well as Pitmans Close and Warrior Square, could all be redeveloped into housing.

The full list of sites were not included on the website, and the information was changed after the Echo questioned the council.

The council’s deputy leader Ron Woodley, who also oversees transport, admitted this information had been made public too soon but promised there is no chance that housing will be built on the Gas Works car park for years to come.

Mr Woodley has spent months telling rival councillors the parking spaces at the Gas Works justified controversial plans to cut parking spaces and redevelop the Seaway car park into a new leisure centre.

He insisted the administration still does not have plans to stop using it as a car park and said the leaked information from Troy Planning does not undercut the argument he has made for Seaway.

He said: “We only had a meeting about this on Tuesday and I pointed out then we won’t be having housing on the Gas Works site as we have just spent money on increasing the parking there.

“This is just a feasibility study so they can ask us as a cabinet what we think.

“I told them we are using the Gas Works as a car park to service the seafront.”

However, Conservative Group leader Tony Cox said the fact the council is exploring building homes on the car park should have been made public months ago when the Seaway plans were being discussed.

He said: “This information should have been part of the Seaway decision.

“The administration lied and told us there would be surplus car parking but in fact there won’t be because the parking will be taken up by houses.

“People thought we were making it up that the Gas Works was a car park only temporarily but this shows this is an anti-car administration.”

The wording was later watered down to indicate the plans are looking at the “art of the possible” and the sites are “mostly” in council ownership.