COUNCILLORS have backed plans to build more than 100 new homes on the edge of a former pit village, despite widespread opposition from existing residents.

VB Turnbull’s plans to create a new housing estate on the western edge of Wheatley Hill have been the talk of the village for some years, with opinion divided over whether the firm should be allowed to build on ten acres of farmland between the A181 and Wingate Lane.

Today (Tuesday, March 1), a residents' representative pleaded with Durham County Council’s county planning committee to throw out the proposals.

The woman, who called herself simply Joanne, said the project would benefit only corporate business, not the people of Wheatley Hill, and would deface the “only attractive area of the village”.

The new homes would attract commuters who would add nothing to the village, she said, and instead the many areas of brownfield land should be redeveloped.

“People feel passionate this should not happen. Please preserve the beauty and heritage of Wheatley Hill, a proud mining village,” she concluded.

However, councillors unanimously backed the scheme, which will include 11 “affordable” two bedroom bungalows and 40 houses with four bedrooms, 51 with three and four with two.

Councillor Mike Dixon said the committee recognised the concerns of objectors but housing development was part of the economic development of the county.

Cllr Alan Shield said there were not sufficient policy grounds to refuse permission, while Cllr Grenville Holland said brownfield sites should be promoted for redevelopment but he supported approving this scheme.

Cllr David Boyes, who pointed out several mistakes in the council report – including the first paragraph saying the site was near West Auckland, said he was disappointed only ten per cent of the houses would be “affordable”.

Cllr John Clare said planning committees were not a popularity contest and it did not matter how many people opposed the scheme.

Cllr Paul Taylor said he was not enthusiastic about development outside settlement boundaries and on greenfield sites but the proposal accorded with current planning policy, leaving councillors “nowhere to go”.

Committee chair Cllr Keith Davidson said councillors were caught between a rock and a hard place and had to go with planning policy.

Local councillor Morris Nicholls supported the proposal.

A planning agent speaking for the developer said it was a sustainable site with a low probability of flooding, the village had a reasonable selection of services and facilities and there was spare capacity and local primary and secondary schools.