Residents out to fight plans for hundreds of new homes

Holystone Action Group meeting outside North Tyneside Council to hand over a petition to call for a debate over the consultation regarding the Core Strategy.
Holystone Action Group meeting outside North Tyneside Council to hand over a petition to call for a debate over the consultation regarding the Core Strategy.
0
Have your say

RESIDENTS have voiced their concerns over plans to build hundreds of homes on land at Holystone.

Northumberland Estates has submitted a planning application to North Tyneside Council to build up to 450 houses at Scaffold Hill.

Many residents in the area, however, oppose the development as they believe it will ruin the open farmland, green fields and wildlife corridors there.

Residents also fear that the traffic in the area is already at capacity.

A public meeting was held by Holystone Action Group last week at West Allotment Social Club and Institute to give those opposed to the proposed development the chance to have their say.

Keith Page, a member of the group, said: “The meeting was very positive.

“We provided information about the development and guided people on how they can object.

“There is a wide frustration that there does not seem to be anything changing despite the concerns that residents have.

“The main crux of it, I think, is that the council says that we have to have development, and we’re not disputing that, but the development in Scaffold Hill is simply wrong.

“There are other sites that are far better to pick – not areas that will destroy the wildlife corridors.”

The action group has submitted a petition backed by 2,583 signatories calling for a debate over the council’s preferred options for a core strategy.

Keith said: “Through the preferred options proposals, the council has taken an approach to development which focuses on greenfield sites and which would see the destruction of wildlife corridors and biodiversity on significant amounts of open land.

“Most of the borough will be concreted over.

“It would be so wrong for a council to ruin it for future generations.”

The council declined to comment prior to its planning committee considering the application.