A CONTENTIOUS development in a Darlington conservation area has been given the go-ahead after revised plans were accepted on appeal.

In recent years Darlington Borough Council’s planning committee has twice refused permission for developers to build on a neglected patch of land behind Hill Garth in Cockerton.

Appeals against those decisions were also rejected, but after developers submitted scaled down plans – including the removal of a one and a half storey unit - a proposal for a two-storey building incorporating four apartments has been accepted by the Planning Inspectorate.

The Appeal Decision report states that whilst the inspector accepted that the development would “substantially alter” the outlook of the nearby Hill Garth properties, it would not affect the residents’ quality of life to an unacceptable degree.

The development had also attracted objections on the basis that it would present a flood risk, would not preserve or enhance the character of the conservation area and that it would add more traffic to an already congested area.

However, the appeal report noted that no objections had been made by either the Council’s highway officer, conservation officer or from the Environment Agency in regard to these issues.

The inspector also pointed out that there was no detailed evidence to confirm that these suggested problems would be borne out in reality.

Commenting on the appeal decision, a spokesman for Darlington Borough Council said the Planning Inspectorate's decision was one that 'it must accept'.

Jeremy Good, Director at England & Lyle chartered Town Planners, said: “We are delighted to see that our long struggle for planning permission on this land has come to a successful conclusion.

“We always maintained that a suitable scheme could be delivered on this site and are pleased that the planning inspector has been able to see beyond residents’ relentless objections to any proposals on the site.”

The site, which has become derelict and overgrown, was first targeted for development back in 2006.

Nearby residents strongly opposed the plans, leading to subsequent revisions and re-applications leading to this week's appeal outcome.