Houghton housing plan refused by Sunderland city councillors

At a meeting this week, Sunderland City Council’s Planning and Highways Committee refused plans for land to the rear of Abbey Drive in the Houghton ward.

Applicant BG Construction and Developments Ltd had applied to the council for permission to erect three three-bedroom terraced houses with front and rear gardens.

According to a report presented to councillors, the proposed site was bound by residential properties and faced a garage block, as well as being identified as “amenity greenspace” by the Local Authority.

In the report prepared for members of the Planning and Highways Committee, council planners recommended the scheme for refusal.

A number of reasons were cited including the style, layout and character of the housing plan creating an “isolated development which would be incongruent with the existing built form” and “out of character” with existing residential development.

Council planners also said the proposal would “fail to provide satisfactory living conditions due to poor outlook from the new dwellings, with the windows to the front of the properties looking onto an existing garage block”.

Other issues included the plans impacting the amenity of a rear garden area at 94 Abbey Drive in terms of “visual intrusion, dominance and overshadowing”.

The final reason for refusal included the “absence of a safe pedestrian route to the proposed properties” which, council planners said, would “create conditions hazardous to pedestrian and highway safety”.

The council’s refusal recommendation followed public opposition to the proposals, with 12 objections submitted to the council during a consultation exercise.

Houghton ward councillors also spoke against the plans at a Planning and Highways Committee meeting at City Hall on July 31, 2023.

Councillor Juliana Heron raised concerns about the community impacts of the loss of green space and the “poor access” to the site.

Councillor Mark Burrell added there could be conflict between garage owners and residents of the new homes around parking and access if plans were approved.

Cllr Burrell told the meeting: “Developments on compromised plots like this can cause friction for existing residents and any new residents in their homes.

“There will remain a large open area of amenity grass just behind the garages.

“Again this could cause anti-social behaviour issues with some local residents utilising what is left of the open amenity space, being caused by the development, for use or entry into the areas.

“The development at present does not seek to meet the requirements for space standards so we should aim for quality developments not compromised development dwellings with many flaws”.

After being put to the vote, Planning and Highways Committee members agreed unanimously to reject the plans.

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