70 homes at Land East Of Buckingham Terrace, Leeholme

What was proposed

The application proposed 70 homes, including seven affordable properties, with a spine road, parking, public open space, play space and drainage infrastructure.

“The application seeks full planning permission for the erection of 70 dwellings in the form of 8no. two bed bungalows, 3no. two bed semi-detached properties, 42no. three bed dwellings, and 17no. four bed dwellings across 10 house types. This includes the delivery of 7no. affordable homes in the form of 3no. two bed semi-detached properties and 4no. three bed semi-detached properties.”

“A central spine road is proposed which branches out to clusters of properties served by private shared driveways. An area of public open space is proposed to the north west of the southern portion of the site, to include an area of children’s play space, with a SUDs basin to be located to the southern part.”

Officer report

The site and its history

The site is about three hectares of grassed land surrounded mainly by housing, with former terraced streets remaining after homes were demolished in the 1980s.

“The application site comprises a parcel of approximately 3ha of open grassed land within the settlement of Leeholme, to the east of Coundon. The site is divided into two by a central area which accommodates a number of trees. The larger northern portion is surrounded by terraced houses on three sides, with the southern area bordered by terraced housing fronting onto Osbourne Street to the east and allotments to the west with open countryside to the south.”

“The site comprises the former streets of Pembroke, Lincoln and Sussex which previously accommodated rows of terraced housing running north to south. According to historical mapping, housing was present from the 1920’s until sometime in the 1980’s when demolition took place. Following the demolition of the houses, the land has grassed over in time.”

Officer report

Earlier committee consideration

The application had previously been deferred so discussions could continue about financial contributions, and further consultation followed.

“The application is being reported to the South West Area Planning Committee in accordance with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation as it constitutes major residential development with a site area under 4ha.”

“It is noted that the application was presented to the Committee on the 28 th of July 2025, where members resolved to defer its determination to allow further discussions to be held with the applicant regarding the requested financial contributions. Following this, a review of the requests in consultation with the relevant consultees has taken place and discussions held with the applicant. This is discussed further under the Planning Obligations section of the report.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the scheme was considered policy compliant overall, with benefits outweighing moderate harm from tree loss.

“The loss of semi-mature and mature trees is considered to have a moderate visual impact locally for the medium term. No high quality (Category A) trees would be lost and a number of moderate quality trees would be retained. 129 trees are proposed to be planted to help mitigate for the tree loss, with the majority of these proposed to be planted to areas of public open space.”

“In conclusion, whilst the loss of trees would cause moderate harm in the medium term whilst the proposed replacement planting becomes established, the scheme is policy compliant in all other respects and on balance the benefits of the proposed development is considered to outweigh this harm, thus complying with CDP Policy 40.”

Officer report

Consultees and public responses

Key consultees raised no objections subject to conditions, while 92 objections cited pressure on services, highways, the environment, amenity and the village’s character.

“Highways Authority – Raise no objection to the application subject to conditions.”

“Infrastructure and Local Services • Local schools and dentists are already over capacity and cannot accommodate additional pupils and patients. • There is limited healthcare access as Station View Medical Centre only opens when GPs are available and appointments are handled off-site in Bishop Auckland. • Power cuts are frequent, indicating existing strain on infrastructure. • Slow broadband speeds.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A planning officer presented the case, a councillor and resident spoke against it, and the applicant spoke in support.

The votes

A motion to defer was proposed, followed by motions to approve and refuse; the approval motion was lost.

“Councillor M Stead added that questions asked by members had to related to material planning considerations. The County Durham Plan had rules to follow to provide guidance for when an appeal came in. The request for additional clarification over Section 106 contributions had been granted and provided.”

“It was noted the application had been moved and seconded for approval and upon a vote being taken, the motion was LOST.”

Minutes

The final decision

The committee refused the application because it considered the proposal to contravene transport policies requiring safe and sustainable links.

“The Principal Planning Officer advised that Councillor N Brown could use Policy 6f and 21 of the County Durham Plan regarding safe and sustainable transport links with the hierarchy of preference being to prioritise sustainable modes of transport for those with mobility issues, then walking, cycling and cars.”

“Councillor A Savory remarked that the application had already been deferred. She had taken the time to listen to all the data which officers had gathered and the application had to be determined on its own merit. She could see no material planning reason to refuse as the benefits outweighed the harm especially with the addition of Section 106 contributions. If the application was refused it would cost the council money at appeal therefore moved to approve the application.”

Minutes