Housing development plans refused over concerns about a loss of green space

Sunderland City Council’s Planning and Highways Committee has rejected an application for land described as “open green space” to the rear of Abbey Drive in the Houghton ward.

The plans from BG Construction and Developments Ltd aimed to erect three terraced houses, each with three bedrooms and front and rear gardens.

During council consultation on the plans, the application sparked opposition with eight representations objecting to the development.

Concerns ranged from access, parking and traffic issues to the loss of green space and impacts on wildlife.

The planning application was presented for decision at a meeting of the city council’s Planning and Highways Committee at City Hall on Monday, July 3.

All three Houghton ward councillors attended the meeting to speak in objection, raising concerns about the loss of green space and urging decision-makers to reject the plans.

Councillor Mark Burrell, one of the three Houghton councillors, said: “This section of land [the development site] was developed for garages and the infrastructure as such was designed for that purpose.

“The road structure and surface is poor. In the plans there does not seem to be improvements to the plan to cope with the new useage or make it more suitable for increased traffic.

“Shoehorning houses into land not designed for such proposals or where the infrastructure will not be adjusted does not seem to me to be good planning”.

During the planning process a letter was sent to council planning officials, on behalf of the applicant, making a case for the development on the green space.

The letter, published on the council’s planning portal website, described the site as a “grassed over parcel of estate land with little amenity value and no redeeming features such [as] street furniture, playground equipment or landscaped areas”.

The letter added that the application site, and its current “poor condition”, meant it was “not regarded as a valuable community asset with respect to its recreational value”.

A report presented to the Planning and Highways Committee by council officers on July 3, 2023, recommended the housing plans for refusal on several grounds.

This included the plans having an “adverse effect on the amenity, recreational and community function value of the site as greenspace”.

Although it was noted the developer had agreed to enter into an agreement to provide improvements to greenspace within the wider area, council planners suggested these benefits would “not outweigh the adverse amenity impacts caused by the loss of open space” near Abbey Drive.

A second reason for refusal also referenced “the style, layout and character of the proposal”.

It was argued that the plans would “result in an isolated development which would be incongruent with the existing built form” and would not “respect and enhance the positive qualities of nearby properties and the locality”.

After being put to the vote, the Planning and Highways Committee agreed to reject the housing development in line with the recommendations of planning officers.

Councillor Michael Dixon said he was concerned about the proposed vehicle access and added that points raised by ward councillors about access issues for emergency vehicles had been “persuasive”.

Councillor Iain Scott, referencing the report from planning officers, raised concerns about the loss of green space.

He said: “It’s been said that the Houghton ward has a high quantity but low quality in terms of amenity of green space.

“In Burnside, this particular neighbourhood, there’s a low quantity and a low quality of amenity of greenspace.

“For that reason I can’t disagree with the findings of the report and I think it’s quite key that that green space is kept as is.”

Councillor Melanie Thornton, chair of the Planning and Highways Committee, also asked councillors to reflect on recent planning appeals in the Houghton area.

Cllr Thornton continued: “The two areas Tintern Close and Burns Avenue North have recently gone through the appeals [process].

“The Planning Inspectorate concluded both cases represented the efficient use of land and that the loss of the green space would have an adverse effect and cause significant harm to the provision of green space.

“This is exactly what the ward councillors have said. I think we have to be very wary of applications like this and I do agree with the recommendation to refuse”.

The applicant has the right to challenge the council’s refusal decision by lodging an appeal with the Secretary of State.