By 1857 the three founders had reorganised their tenants-in-common arrangement into individually owned specific plots. Some plots had also by this time been sold on to third parties.

This plan dated 2 Feb 1857 shows allocations in the southern half of the Park

By 17 August 1857 a plan covering the full covenanted area was included with indentures. This records changes* since the February plan interestingly showing division of plots indicating the intention to build double properties. (*While this plan is part of an 1857 document it is possible that the names on the plots were added later)See footnote...

NB - the named plan is difficult to read hence the table below gives the named plots -
Plot ownership shown related to current postal numbers.

• plot 1 (now nos:56;58) to Griffiths;Foulks
• plots 2thro'7 (now not in the Park) to Dickson the adjoining land owner
• plots 8;9;10 (now 54;52;50;48;46) also to Dickson
• plot 11 (now 42;40) to Haswell;Denson
• plot 12 (now 36) to Denson
• plots 13;14 (now 32;28,30, & drives to 32A & 34) to Woodward
• plots 15;16;17 (now 26;24;84;80;76;74) to Pitt
• plots 18;19;20;21;22 (now 72;70;68;66;64;62;60) to Shone
• plot 23 (now 21;19) to Holland;Pitt
• plot 24 (now 17;15) to Wood
• plot 25 (now 13;11;9) to Wood;Roberts
• plot 26 (now 7;5) to Evans; Wilkins
• plots 27;28 (now 3;1;33;31) to Wilkins
• plot 29 (now 29;27) to Jones
• plot 30 (now 25;23) to Pitt

Despite the apparent advanced state of these 1857 plans; b y the Spring 1861 census the Park had only 4 households -
Two were founding fathers Pitt and Wood.

• Pitt lived at no:84 (possibly a double originally)
• Wood lived at no:13 (a double)

Whether the other two households were the other halves or whether they were another one or two properties is not certain. However, they are not signatories on the 1870 Covenant Release document and hence it is a reasonable assumption that they were tenants to Pitt and Wood in the other halves of their double properties.

Details of these four households can be seen in the 1861 census

Pitt had built his house in the top northerly corner of the Park at the end of the Mill yard and orchard. Presumably this helped with access. Wood's house may have been built after Pitt's when the roadway was usable. Quite possibly the Avenue access was later than the mill access.

During the 1860s it is likely that other properties were built - the most likely being...
• nos: 5 / 7
• nos: 40 / 42
• nos: 1 / 3
• nos: 56 / 58

All these first properties were doubles (although the original state of no:84 has not been fully established). The practice appears to have deviated well from the original Hitchen plan.

Why wasn't the grand plan working out?

It may have been that the property market was slumping a little after the high activity of the 1850s. The Queen's Park history also tells of this slowdown. Maybe it took time to pursuade homeseekers to come to Upton Park when Queen's Park was more established and with the new bridge; much closer to the city and the railway network. It may simply have been the building boom causing over supply or the Upton Park prices being too high.

footnote
Abstract covering an Indenture of 17 Aug 1857 has been seen that implies Thomas Wood had covenant juristiction over plots 10,11,24 (ie possibly those surrounding him not already spoken for). In this indenture he released plot 11 to Selina Dickson. This questions when the plot passed to Haswell and Denson ?