Plans for a ‘self-build’ family home in a Boldon Colliery garden are rejected for the second time
Plans for a “self-build” family home in a rear garden have been dismissed at appeal for a second time by the national Planning Inspectorate.
A Government-appointed planning inspector has thrown out an appeal against South Tyneside Council’s decision to refuse a detached home to the rear of a property in Boldon Colliery.
Plans asked for permission for a three-bedroom house at Kingswood Close using fencing to create a plot separate from the existing address and forming a new vehicular access onto Cotswold Lane.
However, council planning officers rejected the scheme over fears the proposals would “result in significant harm to highways safety.”
A previous bid for a family home on the site was refused by the council in 2024 following council officers’ fears about the new access onto a “local distributor road” and vehicles manoeuvring and parking at the location.
An appeal against the ruling was later thrown out.
Resubmitting the plans
Applicants later resubmitted plans which proposed a property with a larger driveway and space to manoeuvre two resident vehicles; arguing the relocated parking area would enable vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward gear.
However, the council’s highway authority continued to raise concerns about vehicular access, vehicles associated with visitors and deliveries, the location of bus stops and junction opposite, and pedestrian safety at the adjacent zebra crossing.
South Tyneside Council’s planning department refused the resubmitted plans in early-2026 and an appeal was subsequently lodged with the national Planning Inspectorate.
Rejected by the national Planning Inspectorate
A planning inspector appointed by the Secretary of State has since sided with the council and dismissed the appeal.
While noting that the proposal would contribute towards the borough’s housing supply, the planning inspector concluded the plans would “result in unacceptable harm to highway safety”.
This included the new vehicular access onto Cotswold Lane “increasing the overall level of interaction between vehicles, and between vehicles and pedestrians” and “potential conflict in a location that is already sensitive in highway terms”.
It was noted that the “absence of recorded accidents in the vicinity does not, in itself, demonstrate that the proposed arrangement would be safe”.
The appeal decision report adds: “I acknowledge the amended parking and turning arrangements would reduce the likelihood of vehicles reversing onto the highway and would provide space for visitor parking within the site.
“However, while the provision of on-site parking would reduce the likelihood of parking associated with the dwelling taking place on the highway, it would not preclude it entirely.”