In 2016 South Tyneside Strategic Land Review reported that the Greenbelt land to the South of Fellgate as not suitable for development (coloured in RED)!
What has changed? certainly not the land or activities that happen on the land.
The council now seem to be content with the loss of greenbelt land and the damage that will be caused to wildlife, farming and biodiversity in the area.
AT Risk
This includes farmland birds (Swans, ducks, barn owls, wood pigeons, collared doves, kestrel, yellow hammer, red kites and many other nesting birds). Other wildlife such as Batts, foxes, rabbits, voles, squirrels hedgehogs thrive on the land.
Taken from 2016 report Greenbelt land marked RED and not identified for any form of development.
The report stated:
Key Designations / allocation of the land
- Green Belt / Great North Forest / Habitat Creation Zone / Wildlife Corridor / Linked Open Space System / Local Wildlife Site / Mineral Safeguarding Area / Coal Authority Resource and Standing Advice
Adjacent Designations /Allocations:
- Green Belt / Great North Forest / Wildlife Corridor / Strategic Trunk Network / Listed Building / Important Archaeological Site / Industrial Area / A19 Testos Junction.
Greenbelt (High Impact)
- It is considered that developing this site would have a high impact upon the green belt in an important and sensitive location between Gateshead and South Tyneside.
- Development would protrude past established green belt boundaries and significantly reduce separation. Significant mitigation required where appropriate.
- Residential/Economic development would reduce the current 1380m separation distance between Fellgate and the borough boundary with Gateshead by 910m (66%) and distance between Boldon Colliery and the boundary by 72%.
- Would development on this site impact upon the five purposes of the Green Belt?
- Yes – Check unrestricted sprawl of the built-up area?
- Yes – Safeguard Borough Countryside from Encroachment.
- Yes – Prevent merging of South Tyneside with Sunderland, Washington or Gateshead?
Landscape & Townscape (High Impact)
The Landscape Character Study (2012) identifies the site within the Boldon Fell landscape area which is considered predominantly open with long range views.
The study recommends that linear links between sites of habitat value should be created and promoted, and the areas open aspect and views should be retained.
The site is within a wide-open space corridor which provides wide ranging views of the surrounding landscape and countryside. It is considered that developing this site would have a high impact and significant mitigation would be required. The land is Grade 2 or 3A agricultural Land.
Biodiversity (high Impact)
The site comprises the entire width of a wildlife corridor and includes part of the Calf Close Burn Local Wildlife Site. This is a linear site following the course of a small burn as it flows north across agricultural land and has the largest long-standing reedbed in the borough – see Local Wildlife and Geodiversity Sites Technical Appendices (2010).
Recent ecology studies for this broad area in support of a potential international Advanced Manufacturing Park have identified that there are Great Crested Newts
Newt habitats within 500m of this site, and there are barn owls habitat onsite. It is considered that developing the site would have a high impact as it is of large scale within a wildlife corridor. Significant mitigation would be required.
- Local Wildlife Site (LWS)
- Great Crested Newt Pond (+500m buffer)
- Wildlife Corridor
Infrastructure & Services (High Impact)
The site is isolated from local shopping services, has good access to open space green infrastructure but is lacking in playing pitch, allotments and children’s play area provision.
It is also adjacent to bus stops on the strategic route and trunk network. Local education and community capacity is lacking. It is considered that the site would have a high impact in regard to capacity of and access to infrastructure and services. It is isolated from services and is of a scale that would put significant pressure on local capacity such as green infrastructure and education and community facilities. Significant infrastructure investment and mitigation would be required due to the scale of potential development.
Biodiversity net gain (BNG) became mandatory on 12/02/2024
South Tyneside must deliver a Net gain of 10% in Biodiversity. This means any future development needs to deliver more or better quality natural habitat than there was before development.
How are South Tyneside Council going to do that given the size and scale of Green Belt loss proposed? Where else in the borough can biodiversity be increased on this scale?
West Fellgate Farm House and Cottage
This is a working farm one of the few left in the borough which has been farmed by the same family for 5 generations. In 1992 Tyne and Wear Specialist Conservation Team acknowledged Architectural Quality and presented Mr Alderslade with a Good Design Award.
If the council approve this build they will be stripping them of their career, livelihood and future!
Suitability and Conclusion
The 2016 report stated, “It is not considered that the site is suitable for development due to the site’s overall likely high impacts on green belt, landscape, biodiversity and green Infrastructure, in addition to likely significant pressure on infrastructure capacity”.
What has changed since 2016?
Proposed entry and exit via Mill Lane roundabout and or the slip road from Durham Drive will cause increased significant traffic delays on the A194. Traffic is already above capacity at peak periods (National Highways) despite recent road improvements. Gateshead authority has made a number of representation on this risk and are suggesting that the area needs further analysis and remediation.
Proposed accesses at Durham Drive will increase traffic to the A194 and will exacerbate the current ‘rat-run’ on Fellgate Avenue, Hedworth Lane, Abingdon Way and other minor roads which again traffic is very heavy at peak periods.
Also, you would have to consider additional traffic for delivery and service to this new build and not just the 2 car residents’ use.
Section 106: a legal agreement or deed, signed by the council and an applicant, developer or another party. They’re generally required to mitigate impacts that a development will have on its immediate locality. It sets out what financial contributions will be paid to the council by the developer.
Recent research has shown that such agreements if and when implemented can be used anywhere within the local authority.
Also section 106 obligations can be modified or discharged in two distinct way;
1. Within 5 years from the date of completing the obligation via an agreement between the Council and the person/s whom the charge is enforceable against.
2, After 5 years starting with the date the obligation was completed.
Therefore, it is legally possible and more probable that any such agreements can lapse by the time the development is completed. Remembering that the council are saying they need to build around 350 homes per year.
Can Section 106 policy really mitigate the harm to the habitat and feeding grounds for wildlife especially farmland birds?
Wildlife has already been displaced to this green belt land from the IAMP site, where would they go next?
How are a School, GP Practice and shops going to be created, funded, staffed, and when?
Are these to be developed first and stood virtually dormant for years until sufficient houses are built? or will they be built near the end of the development? if so this would put significant pressure on existing services.
Lastly the planners attending the open meetings seemed oblivious to any flooding issues. Clearly they do not live nearby, or having not done any research.
The proposal to dump rainwater from houses into two small burns will increase the risk of significant flooding. Given the change in climate to wetter weather with higher downpours and the flash floods seen recently, the existing infrastructure cannot cope now, let alone having another 1200 houses.
