COUNCILLORS have backed residents who feared the balconies of flats in a proposed development could invade their privacy and cause disturbance.

Durham City Council's development control committee has imposed a condition that the balconies are not to be included in the redevelopment of a shop and flat at the north end of North Road, in the city centre.

The proposal was to rebuild the shop with three apartments above it, each with a balcony.

But residents in nearby Tenter Terrace objected to the scheme, saying it would lead to noise and nuisance. Because they would overlook their homes, it would cause a loss of privacy in the terrace's gardens.

They said they belived it was likely that the flats would be rented to students at the city's university.

Residents' spokesman Paul Hodgkinson told councillors the residents' main concern was late-night noise.

"Open doors leading on to the students' balconies will increase the level of noise," he said.

Development control manager Allan Simpson said the balconies were relatively small and were some way from the houses in Tenter Terrace.

He said the council's environmental health department had raised no objection to the proposals and that there was no reason to delete the balconies from the scheme.

He added that they would be quite unlikely to lead to congregations of people.

But local councillor and deputy mayor Grenville Holland backed the residents, saying that what they wanted "is very reasonable, I think".

He said that students gathering on the balconies late at night "would prove an unpleasant distraction for people who would want some rest".

Mr Simpson said he had no knowledge' that the flats would be let to students.

"I don't feel we have any evidence to support the fear of noise and disturbance," he said.

Another local councillor, Jeffrey Young, said: "It is patently obvious that the quality of life is one of the things we should consider with this application."

Council cabinet member Dennis Southwell said that residents' quality of life was at stake, and that the balconies should be removed from the scheme.

The committee gave the scheme approval, but with several conditions, including the non-inclusion of the balconies and another specifying the standard of the back of the building matches that of the front.