The proposal South of Marske proposal should be a straight rejection - but Labour‘s malicious 2018 Local Plan makes matters complicated.
There is no doubt the South of Marske development is an ugly development for three key reasons:
The housing designs are cheap (despite being set at a high price), poor standard and of a poor design. They are not sandstone cottages, they are ten-a-penny, stack ‘em high 4 bed detached houses.
The estate design includes little green space and the urban design is almost non existent. There are few trees, outside spaces are close to roads and railway lines. The outside edge of the development lacks privacy as windows are next to people passing on roadways and close to cars queueing on at two pinch points.
The development is not sustainable. The 810 houses are banged into a space of the size of Churchill Drive and Sherwood Drive Estates - but with less semi-detached houses. The space is so tight the Pension Fund applicant has funded the maths on their site layout key to make it look as though the houses fit.
Seven out of eleven planning applications against mass developers live Taylor Wimpey are now being won on appeal grounds by citing unsustainable and ugly design (1).
The National Planning Policy Framework outlines the reasons for rejection based on design. We should be shooting fish in a barrel. Please consult the document for the rejection grounds (2).
The Redcar and Cleveland plan complicates matters. In 2018 Labour’s administration included the fields owned by the West Midlands Pension Fund in their local plan - this document is still valid and is up for review post 2023 local election. I consider this inclusion malicious and revenge for 2014’s uprising. In 2014 we narrowly lost a vote to ditch the 2014 local plan including South of Marske as a Development site, when I was an independent councillor. In 2015, when we overthrew Labour to form a Lib Dem - Independent coalition and we removed the South of Marske site from the plan. The site’s inclusion from the 2018 plan means we can’t go for rejection of the planning proposal based on permitted boundaries. There are many examples of this rejection and it is the easiest for a council to use.
Ugly design is one ground still left open to us - there are others in the policy framework. Next week I will forensically go through the framework and compare the South of Marske proposal. Every deviation will be cited. This is how we defeated the previous plans - even when the Labour councils shafted us with their local plans - and this is how we win the appeal.
The National Planning Policy Framework https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1005759/NPPF_July_2021.pdf