Subscribe to updates
You'll receive weekly summaries about County Durham Council every week.
If you have any requests or comments please let us know at community@opencouncil.network. We can also provide custom updates on particular topics across councils.
Area Planning Committee (Central and East) - Tuesday, 14 July 2026 - 1.00 pm
July 14, 2026 at 1:00 pm Area Planning Committee (Central and East) View on council websiteSummary
Open Council Network is an independent organisation. We report on County Durham and are not the council. About us
The Area Planning Committee (Central and East) of Durham County Council met on Tuesday 14 July 2026 to discuss three planning applications. The meeting's agenda included proposals for new housing developments in Newton Hall and Brandon, as well as a change of use application for a property in Gilesgate.
Applications to be determined by the Area Planning Committee (Central and East)
Land at 40-82 Farnham Road, Newton Hall, Durham, DH1 5LA
The committee was scheduled to consider an application for the construction of 22 affordable dwellings, with associated parking, open space, and Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS). The site, which previously accommodated 22 dwellings that have since been demolished, is located within the built-up area of Newton Hall. The proposals aimed to redevelop the site with a mix of two, three, and four-bedroom homes, all intended to be affordable units. The application included plans for 44 dedicated parking spaces and 11 visitor parking bays, along with on-site amenity and public open space. The report indicated that the development would achieve a Biodiversity Net Gain of 4.58% on-site, with the remaining required gain to be secured through off-site credits.
Land at Silver Courts, Vicarage Flats, Rowan Lea and Red Firs, Brandon, Durham, DH7 8NP
This application concerned the construction of 90 dwellings, with associated landscaping and infrastructure, on a former housing site in Brandon. The site previously contained 121 dwellings, which have now been demolished. The proposed development aimed to provide a mix of two, three, and four-bedroom homes, all intended to be affordable housing provided by Believe Housing, including social rent, shared ownership, and rent to buy tenures. The plans included four vehicular accesses, in-curtilage parking for all properties, and visitor spaces. The development was designed to incorporate a linear green public open space and SuDS features. A significant aspect of the proposal was the provision of developer contributions towards nursery/early years capacity, secondary school provision, SEND provision, and improvements to public open space. The report noted a reduction in public open space compared to the previous site layout, but highlighted improvements in landscaping and a Biodiversity Net Gain of 19.15%.
55 Bradford Crescent, Gilesgate, Durham, DH1 1HL
The committee was scheduled to discuss a change of use application for a property at 55 Bradford Crescent, Gilesgate, Durham. The proposal sought to change the use from a dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) to a flexible use, allowing it to operate as a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) (Use Class C4) or a dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) for a period of 10 years, under Class V of Part 3 of the General Permitted Development Order. The application also included plans for a single-storey rear extension, cycle parking, and bin storage. The report highlighted that an appeal against non-determination had been made, meaning the Planning Inspectorate would ultimately decide on the application. However, the committee was asked to confirm the decision they would have made. Concerns had been raised by local residents and a councillor regarding the proliferation of HMOs in the area, parking issues, and residential amenity. The report indicated that the proposed development would result in 9.2% of properties within a 100-metre radius being Class N exempt, which is below the 10% threshold outlined in the County Durham Plan's Policy 16. The Highway Authority raised no objection, noting that while the proposal did not fully meet the Council's Parking and Accessibility SPD requirements, previous appeal decisions had established that this alone would not sustain a refusal.
Attendees
Topics
Meeting Documents
Reports Pack