85-home residential scheme at Askew Road, Gateshead

“DESCRIPTION OF SITE 1.2 The site is situated to the north west of Askew Road (A184) and is broadly rectangular, with the greater dimension north east to south west. It lies between the Redheugh Bridge (A189) southbound slip road to the south west, the East Coast railway line to the north west, and the neighbouring Network Rail premises to the north east (with Askew Road to the south east).”

“The site itself consists of mostly overgrown grassland/scrub, hedges and trees. To the south west is a landscaped area and shared use path, which are between the site and the Redheugh Bridge slip road. The boundary at this part of the site itself includes within it, some of the shared use path and existing landscaping trees, along with the aforementioned access road turning head.”

“CONCLUSION 6.1 Whilst the proposal would not fully comply with all requirements of the Urban Core Sub-Area policies, would not fully demonstrate the quality of urban design sought by the development plan, would not accord in all respects with the Council's highways layout and parking guidance, and would not provide public art, play or open space or street trees, or all the potential affordable housing that could have been anticipated, officers consider that these…”

“Whilst the Council cannot currently demonstrate a five-year deliverable housing land supply, with a supply of 3.07 years identified in the March 2024 Position Statement, the Council's latest Housing Delivery Test result of 105% demonstrates strong housing delivery performance. The housing land supply shortfall nevertheless remains a material consideration weighing in favour of the proposal.”

“The final stages of the application process have resulted in agreement on a comprehensive suite of planning conditions requiring the submission and approval of a final detailed drainage and flood risk management scheme prior to commencement of development.”

“Officers acknowledge that the proposal falls short of best-practice SuDS principles and does not maximise the delivery of multifunctional drainage benefits. This gives rise to conflict with aspects of Policies CS17, MSGP29 and MSGP30 of the Development Plan and Policy F8 of the NPPF and attracts moderate negative weight in the planning balance.”

“One objection has been received and one representation making comments neither in objection or support:”

“- Fewer units would allow for more adequate and logistical car parking and public amenity space…”

“The Committee received an update report on the 8 th September 2026 on the proposed landscaping includes tree and structural planting that does not fully meet the aspirations of NPPF 2026 Policy N3, further planting opportunities may be secured through landscaping and biodiversity conditions.”

“N81-3139-100-P1 Site Location Plan • N81-3139-101-P1 Existing Site Layout • N81-3139-102-P14 Proposed Site Layout • N81-3139-103-P11 Proposed External Finishes • N81-3139-104-P7 Acoustic Glazing Plan • N81-3139-116-P5 Indicative Site Sections • N81-3139-117-P4 Proposed Streetscenes • N81-3139-119-P2 M4(2) Compliant Plots • N81-3139-120-P2 Retention Plan • ASHBUR-END-AS-BB-01.6-5113-5230-Rev6-Sheet201 The Ashburn Working Drawing Pack – Planning Drawings •…”