PLANS to build 45 homes near a Thornaby nature reserve have been put on hold for the second time.

Residents were concerned about the distance between the planned homes and their existing houses on Cayton Drive, with one saying it would become “a peeping Tom’s paradise” as some of the planned houses were just seven metres away.

Councillors from Stockton’s planning committee deferred their decision in July and also asked developers Mandale Construction North to look again at a second access to the site, as the planned access was through a very narrow residential street.

The site is on land south of Cayton Drive, next to Bassleton Beck in Thornaby, which forms part of the Tees Heritage Park.

There were concerns that emergency vehicles would not be able to pass through the parked cars on the street to get to the new homes.

A second access could have been built but for a “ransom strip” – a small strip of land owned by a separate body.

Councillors deferred the application in July so developers would have time to negotiate with the housing association that owned the ransom strip. They said they would prefer the site to have two separate access points rather than just one.

Wednesday’s planning meeting heard the developer had called the housing association, but had not yet received a call back.

Councillor David Wilburn said: “The idea that somebody telephoned is less than a minimal effort. I would suggest they came back with a good reason as opposed to people didn’t answer the telephone.”

Cllr Sylvia Walmsley added: “The applicant has gone away and in reality done very little at all.”

She said she believed the best point of access would be off Mitchell Avenue, a busier road.

Thornaby town councillor Steve Walmsley, who spoke at the meeting, said: “The relationship to the development with existing homes is so close they could almost share washing lines.”

Cllr Phil Dennis added: “I still have the same concerns about the site and the impact on its neighbours.”

Mandale Construction’s original outline plans for the site were rejected by the planning committee, but overturned on appeal to the planning inspector. However, when the inspector passed the plans the site had two points of access.

The latest plans to come before the council are the more detailed plans. Councillors voted unanimously to defer them.