A PLANNING inspector has rejected controversial housing proposals which would have effectively linked Peterlee and Easington Village.
He is recommending that the scheme be dropped from Easington District Council's local plan, because it will eat up attractive countryside.
The council earmarked fields at Mickle Hill, behind Lowhills Road, on Peterlee's northern outskirts, for up to 600 homes.
Yuill Homes and Alfred McAlpine Homes are hoping to carry out the £50m development, which was strongly opposed by residents in the village, because it would bring Peterlee to their doorsteps.
The inspector supported the residents' view and said the development would be intrusive and destroy versatile agricultural land.
Easington District Council will now have to decide whether to drop the proposals from the local plan, which is the blueprint for development in the district over the next few years.
Eileen Hopper, chairman of Easington Village Parish Council, said: "We are very delighted with the inspector's recommendation. We worked hard for it and spoke against the development at the public inquiry.
"We thought Peterlee was crawling too close to the village and the district seemed to think that was the only way it could go. What would happen ten years hence when it wanted to crawl a bit further, is anyone's guess."
Yuill Homes' land director Nigel Bell said: "National policy is to concentrate new development in major city centres.
"Peterlee with its industrial estates, schools, town centre and other facilities, plays a dominant role in east Durham, and focusing new housing here is part of regional and county policy.
"We can't build in the green belt and there is very little public demand in the villages, so schemes like this are critical to the region's future.
"The development of three, four and five bedroom properties would substantially extend the choice and quality in the township, increasing its attractiveness to inward investors and bring extra spending power into the town centre.
"We already have dozens of sales inquiries from people about the development and are still hopeful that we can get the go-ahead to proceed.''
No one was available for comment in Easington District Council's planning department.
ech
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article