PROPOSALS to create a controversial housing development in north Durham have been recommended for refusal.

Councillors are due to discuss Story Homes’ application to develop land on the outskirts of Lanchester on Tuesday, June 2, at County Hall in Durham.

The house builder hopes to create almost 150 homes near Newbiggin Lane, but the planning authority has received 1,357 letters of objection, and just seven letters of support.

The plan includes 94 detached properties, as well as 55 terraced and semi detached homes, with a range of two to five bedrooms in each.

In a statement, the company, which claims the multi million pound development would create 120 jobs, said: “This proposal presents a significant opportunity to deliver a high quality scheme which will meet housing needs in the county.”

But residents fear the increased risk of flooding, the overdevelopment of the village, the destruction of its rural character and the impact on local services.

Lanchester Parish Council objects over the visual impact it would have, ecological grounds, the effect on the village’s services and the pressure it would put on the existing sewerage system.

The council has also received objections from The Lanchester Partnership and The Campaign to Protect Rural Lanchester, Durham County Councillor Ossie Johnson as well as and Pat Glass MP.

Mrs Glass said: “Development on green field land beyond the village is unacceptable. Concerns are expressed over flood risk, traffic, the shortage of school places and the ability of utilities to cater for the development.”

Henry Jones, Durham County Council’s senior planning officer, has written a report for members of the planning committee advising them to refuse the plan.

He said it would result in an ‘unacceptable incursion into open countryside on green field land with resultant significant landscape and visual harm’.

Mr Jones said: “The scale of the development is considered out of proportion with the role and function of Lanchester.

“It is therefore considered that the proposals would lead to a significant adverse landscape and visual impact causing harm to the intrinsic character and appearance of the countryside as a result of the prominent urban extension proposed on an elevated site with an attractive, rural character.

“The council can demonstrate a five year housing land supply therefore there is no need to give such a degree of weight to the contribution the development would provide to boost the supply of housing that would outweigh this harm.”