Persimmon Homes planning application – Parish Council objection

Objection to the Persimmon Planning Application that has been sent to the Planners Feb 2021:
Objection from NUNTHORPE PARISH COUNCIL to Planning Application 20/0658 submitted by Persimmon Homes in respect of land north of the Nunthorpe Bypass, Nunthorpe Grange, Middlesbrough.
Nunthorpe Parish Council welcomes the reduction in the number of dwellings proposed for Nunthorpe Grange in the revised Planning Application submitted by Persimmon Homes.
However, this statement of objection from the Parish Council explains why Persimmon’s revised application should be rejected on the grounds that the total of 77 dwellings still significantly exceeds the number of houses authorised by the Middlesbrough Housing Local Plan 2014. Therefore, the first section of our statement outlines non-compliance as the fundamental flaw in Persimmon’s submission to Middlesbrough Council’s Planning Committee.
In addition, in the second section, under the heading “Planning Infrastructure Issues”, Nunthorpe Parish Council presents some other significant compliance challenges to the case made by Persimmon Homes.
1. Total Authorised Housing Numbers – 250.
All parties appear to be in agreement that the core documents in this case are the Middlesbrough Housing Local Plan 2014 and the associated Policy H29, which specify “a maximum of 250 predominantly 3 and 4 bedroom detached and semi-detached dwellings” in Nunthorpe Grange.
As a Councillor reminded Middlesbrough’s Planning Committee during its recent consideration of an application for a development in Ford Close, the maximum numbers specified in the Local Plan “are there for a reason.” The maximum figure of 250 for Nunthorpe Grange was clearly specified intentionally, rather than inserted as an oversight, because the Planning Inspector at the time explicitly asked that the wording of this requirement should be restated in order to avoid any possible doubt about the Plan. The maximum figure of 250 was included as being “justified on this site to ensure the densities of development reflect the high quality and low density of those properties in the immediate surrounding area and the type of housing required.” The Housing Local Plan of 2014 has not been replaced, and so the unambiguous maximum of 250 houses remains in force.
Furthermore, in a recent public declaration, Middlesbrough’s Mayor has reaffirmed the Council’s understanding of the authority of the 2014 Housing Local Plan’s assertion that 250 houses in Nunthorpe Grange is the maximum figure acceptable to Middlesbrough Council.
It follows that, to succeed with this planning application, Persimmon must successfully argue that it can somehow set aside Middlesbrough’s core planning framework, replacing the maximum figure of 250 with a higher total figure.
To a considerable extent, Persimmon’s case relies on mention in the Nunthorpe Grange Design Code (2018) of the maximum being “about 350” houses. Persimmon argues that this reference “is a key material planning consideration in the determination of this application and relaxes this restriction” from 250 to 350, and thus “makes a compelling reason to allow the determination of this application”. (Planning Statement, page 44). The argument is that reference in the subsidiary document must be regarded as overriding the Local Plan simply because it is a more recent document.
This is a distortion of the factual situation.
For a start, the Nunthorpe Grange Design Code is explicitly a document “to deliver guidance” (page 3), with the main part being headed as an “Indicative” Masterplan – in contrast to the Planning Inspector’s strong affirmation that the Local Plan is to “ensure” appropriate densities in Nunthorpe Grange. Even Persimmon’s own “Design and Access Statement” accepts the guidance role of the Design Code (Section 3.5), while Persimmon’s “Transport Assessment” goes further, referring to the Nunthorpe Grange site as comprising “26.5 hectares of greenfield land allocated by Middlesbrough Council for up to 250 residential dwellings” (page 7). So it is rather inconsistent that, for the purposes of sidestepping the Local Plan, Persimmon treats a reference to 350 houses in the Design Code as having authority considerably above its declared status as being no more than guidance.
It is probably helpful to recall that the time when the Nunthorpe Grange Design Code was being drafted was also the time when Middlesbrough Council was considering replacing the 2014 Local Plan. There was debate at the time about whether the maximum of 250 dwellings in Nunthorpe Grange should be replaced with a maximum of 350 houses. However, any possible force of these deliberations as a “material consideration” must be limited by the overriding “material consideration” that the operative decision was NOT to replace the 2014 Local Plan in 2019. The truth is that the debates in 2018/2019 left intact the maximum of 250 houses in Nunthorpe Grange. As the Mayor of Middlesbrough has confirmed – “Housebuilding on Nunthorpe Grange will be limited to 250 houses, as stated in the Housing Local Plan (rather than 350 houses or any of the other higher figures previously considered.)”
Persimmon also suggests that the housing limit in the Housing Local Plan should be sidelined because of “changing market conditions”. However, the examples cited of changing market circumstances are little more than subjective opinions which are unaccountably elevated by Persimmon to rank as definitive “material considerations”. These opinions are so subjective that
one possible interpretation by Persimmon of changing circumstances is countered by a contrary interpretation by Persimmon in another part of its own documentation – with market changes apparently moving in opposite directions ! So, we learn that material market changes since 2014 necessitate fewer 5-bedroom homes in order to create more “alternative price points” in Nunthorpe Grange, to counter the “natural saturation point” for executive housing (Design and Access Statement, page 10) – while also requiring even more 5-bedroom houses so that the “character” required in Nunthorpe Grange becomes “more aligned with Nunthorpe Gardens” (Planning Statement, page 44).
Similarly, Persimmon argues that greater recognition of the national housing need provides a rationale for discounting provisions in Middlesbrough’s Local Plan. It is argued that Middlesbrough’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment of 2016, updated in 2017, represents “the most recent and up to date assessment” of the Objective Assessment of Need for Housing, providing compelling “evidence” that 350 units are not just suitable but necessary. (Planning Statement, page 23). This conveniently overlooks the objective analysis of the Office of National Statistics, projecting a reduction in Middlesbrough’s population between 2020 and 2030 when compared with the projection in 2014 – a fall of 7449 between the forecast in 2014 and the forecast in 2018, with a related 90% reduction in housing need.
Even if it is acceptable for anyone to identify “material considerations” which might merit the Local Plan being regarded as irrelevant, the Parish Council could identify much more appropriate considerations. Probably the most significant event faced by Nunthorpe since 2014 is the same as that faced by every community – Covid 19 – but it is as yet far from clear what will be the social and economic consequences. Persimmon does not hazard a guess, but it is unlikely that there will be zero impact on the sale of houses. Perhaps fewer families will be able, or willing, to purchase large and expensive houses. Perhaps more people will wish to downsize to smaller houses. In this connection, a “material consideration” might be the findings of a recent survey of Nunthorpe residents, which found that 41% of those expressing an opinion about moving home identified a bungalow as their preferred type of accommodation (22% of respondents when the 47% of residents who have no plan to move are included). This interest in bungalows is in line with the projections of the Office of National Statistics, which is expecting an increase of 19% among Middlesbrough’s residents aged over 65 during the next ten years, alongside a reduction of 6% among Middlesbrough’s working-age adults. Yet the Persimmon submission apparently assumes that no bungalows are appropriate, because such a perspective is not compatible with its own random selection of “material considerations”.
In short, Persimmon’s attempt to undermine the Housing Local Plan with selective “material considerations” is unbalanced, and can be disregarded as just as inappropriate as its attempt to replace Middlesbrough’s formally established Local Plan with the guidance contained in an indicative Design Code.
Therefore, Nunthorpe Parish Council maintains that, in accordance with planning law and regulations, Middlesbrough Council has established 250 dwellings as the maximum number of houses permitted in Nunthorpe Grange.
2. Persimmon’s Share of Total Permitted Housing.
As explained above, the Local Plan may not authorise more than 250 houses in Nunthorpe
Grange, but it certainly does authorise construction of some of the 250 houses on this site.
Persimmon’s previous application was rejected by the Planning Committee because of being “too high in density” (ie too many houses on this site) – and so the key question for the Planning Committee is : “how many houses might be acceptable?”
Unfortunately the three landowners / developers of Nunthorpe Grange have not yet agreed on an equitable division of the 250 between themselves.
In the absence of agreement, a reasonable starting point might be an allocation based broadly on the proportions of land available to each party. This is not as straightforward as might first appear, depending on such factors as inclusion or exclusion of the 1.7 hectares currently leased to the Nunthorpe and Marton Playing Fields Association, and on the extent to which an allowance is made for primary roads, drainage etc.
However, it is probably reasonably fair to conclude that Persimmon’s land share is between 21% and 25% of the 250 houses. This results in a range between 53 houses (21%) and 63 houses (25%), with the average being 58 houses (23%). Clearly, the 77 houses currently being claimed by Persimmon (at 31%) significantly exceeds this fair share. In the absence of agreement between the parties, and in the absence of a clear rationale why Persimmon might be entitled to deprive Middlesbrough Council and/or Taylor Wimpey of their fair shares, Nunthorpe Parish Council maintains that the application to construct 77 houses should be rejected. Even starting from the most favourable base of 63 houses (25%), it would seem very difficult to justify authorisation of an allocation as high as the 70-house (28%) mid-point between the high-end 63-house (25%) calculation of land share and the 77-house (31%) entitlement currently claimed by Persimmon.
With Persimmon claiming 77 houses and Taylor Wimpey claiming 56 houses, Middlesbrough Council, as the owner of approximately 67.5% of the land, would have only a potential 47% of the house-building capacity – the residual 117 houses.
It would seem perverse for Middlesbrough Council to sanction disproportionate private sector profit, to the detriment of the funding potentially available to Middlesbrough Council.
Therefore, without a reduction in the 31% share asserted by Persimmon, Nunthorpe Parish Council argues that the proposed density remains excessive, and non-compliant with the Housing Local Plan and related Policies.
1. Persimmon’s Share of Responsibility for Community Impact.
A related issue for the Planning Committee is the calculation of Section 106 contributions which are reasonable from the perspective of Persimmon, and reasonable from the perspective of the community.
At the previous hearing of Persimmon’s application for planning permission, the Parish Council expressed concern that the claim for a share of permitted housing was not aligned with the share of infrastructure contributions. We are pleased to note that the current set of Persimmon documents accepts a fair share of responsibility to compensate the Nunthorpe community for whatever the adverse consequences may be of the development of Nunthorpe Grange.
But how can the Planning Committee anticipate the overall impact of the development of Nunthorpe Grange when this remains a matter for consultation between all the parties? If the overall impact can’t yet be assessed, how can a proportion be calculated? If agreement with Persimmon were to be calculated now as a component of the outcome of this planning application, is Persimmon prepared to increase its contribution significantly at a later stage if the community impact is shown at a later stage to be much greater ?
This is yet another reason why Persimmon’s application should be regarded as premature even by those who are not opposed to construction of some housing in Nunthorpe Grange.
The National Planning Policy Framework of February 2019, paragraph 110, requires that applications for development should give first priority to pedestrian and cycle movements, both within the scheme and with neighbouring areas.
The documents provided in support of Persimmon’s application give the impression that this requirement can easily be satisfied because of the proximity of Nunthorpe Gardens.
Some of Persimmon’s statements about this are confidently expressed. The Design and Access Statement identifies as “an Opportunity” the new pedestrian and cycle links across the site to Nunthorpe Gardens “to increase permeability and safeguard strategic connections”. The Framework Travel Plan notes that the nearest bus stops are located on Guisborough Road and can be reached via Nunthorpe Gardens. Similar pronouncements are made in the Transport Assessment about the new connections for cyclists and pedestrians between the Persimmon site and Nunthorpe Gardens.
However, other references are more tentative. A plan at Section 24 of the Design and Access Statement identifies this as a “potential footpath link” and page 35 describes this as a “potential pedestrian link”. The Parish Council suspects that these more circumspect statements reflect considerable doubt about whether there is a right of way between Number 18 and Number 19 Nunthorpe Gardens, with the ownership of the connecting land being shared between three parties (the residents of 18 and 19, and Taylor Wimpey.) Furthermore, our attention has been drawn to a different, but related, challenge about the ownership of the land adjacent to the fence between Nunthorpe Gardens and the Persimmon site.
The Planning Committee would need to be assured that there could be no grounds for a successful challenge to this cycle/pedestrian connection, before it can be satisfied that such planning requirements as those contained in the NPPF can be met. If there is no right for pedestrians and cyclists to pass between the Persimmon site and Nunthorpe Gardens, the Parish Council believes that this undermines the fundamental assumption on which Persimmon has constructed its Framework Travel Plan.
Similarly, an impediment to free passage through Nunthorpe Gardens also poses a challenge for the credibility of the calculation of the likely traffic impact of the Persimmon development, as presented in its Transport Assessment. Persimmon’s Travel Plan states : “It is considered that the impacts on the highway network would not be significant in capacity terms, particularly as the development would operate a Travel Plan aimed at reducing vehicle trips” (Page 39, section 6.15). So, if the Travel Plan depends on the Nunthorpe Gardens link, and the Transport Assessment depends on the Travel Plan, this planning application raises a considerable number of outstanding issues if it is to demonstrate compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework.
In the Report from the Planning Inspectorate to Middlesbrough Council “on the examination of Middlesbrough Housing Local Plan” (31/10/14), Appendix MM40 stipulates as a “main modification…in respect of the housing allocation for land south of Guisborough Road, Nunthorpe, make it explicit that the development will not come forward before there is a commitment to provide either the new East Middlesbrough Link, or Park and Ride in place”. Middlesbrough Council accepted that, to overcome this prohibition on building on Nunthorpe Grange, either the Ladgate Link or the Park and Ride would need to have been “secured” through an agreed “timetable for implementation”.
Nunthorpe Parish Council understands that the Ladgate Link has been effectively abandoned. Middlesbrough Council has certainly taken some initial steps towards a road access to a Park and Ride facility between Church Lane and the A1043 Bypass, by obtaining planning permission for a roundabout on the A1043. However, this hardly constitutes significant progress towards meeting the criteria specified in the 2014 Plan, in the absence of the much greater
development required by Redcar and Cleveland Council, within whose jurisdiction such a facility would be located.
Persimmon appears to accept that this is the situation, noting in its Transport Assessment, section 8, in relation to Park and Ride, that “there are no firm proposals at this time.”
It is, of course, theoretically possible that agreement might be reached among all parties on a more effective way forward to deal with the “Marton Crawl” and other local traffic and transport issues; but, as no such proposal has even been presented to the Parish Council, let alone endorsed, the Parish Council draws attention to this as yet another reason why the Persimmon Plan should be rejected as contrary to planning authorisation.
Nunthorpe Parish Council urges the Planning Committee to reject this application as non-compliant, having regard to the provisions of the Middlesbrough Housing Local Plan 2014 and the National Planning Policy Framework.
January 2021

Meeting of NPC with Taylor Wimpey – Nunthorpe Grange

Meeting between Representatives of Nunthorpe Parish Council
and Taylor Wimpey on 2nd September 2020 regarding NUNTHORPE GRANGE

Steven Longstaff and Rachel Winckles (Taylor Wimpey)
Morgan McClintock and Wade Tovey. (Nunthorpe Parish Council)

The representatives of Taylor Wimpey outlined proposals to construct 56 houses adjacent to
Guisborough Road. Since at least 2014/15, they have had “an option” to develop the site,
subject to planning permission, but it has taken time for Taylor Wimpey to prepare this planning
application. They believe that this is the first planning application by Taylor Wimpey in relation to
this site.
The representatives of Nunthorpe Parish Council articulated the concerns of Nunthorpe
residents about further housing development in Nunthorpe, and noted that, while accepting that
landowners are entitled to submit proposals relating to their land, the Parish Council is currently
engaged in consultation with various Nunthorpe interests and Middlesbrough Council, in an
attempt to obtain a coherent plan in the wider context of the entire site of Nunthorpe Grange.
The Taylor Wimpey representatives stated that Middlesbrough Council’s Planning Department
had made them aware of the additional consultative process recently introduced by
Middlesbrough Council for Nunthorpe, and so they had heard of “Nunthorpe Vision”; but, in
preparing their proposal, the focus of Taylor Wimpey had been the 2014 Housing Plan of
Middlesbrough Council and the Nunthorpe Design Code.
When asked about market research, Taylor Wimpey is confident that they will avoid the
difficulties of some competitors which may have had too great a focus on “Executive” housing,
because the Taylor Wimpey plan for Nunthorpe Grange is for a wide range of house sizes –
from 950 to 1660 sq feet. In response to a question about housing appropriate for elderly
people, which the Parish Council believes to be particularly relevant for Nunthorpe, Taylor
Wimpey repeated that their plan is for a range of housing sizes. However, they are primarily
taking into account the case made by Middlesbrough Council in 2014 that the greatest need of
Middlesbrough is for 3 and 4 bedroom houses. The Parish Council representatives queried
whether this remains the case, in the light of the changes within Middlesbrough Council, the
current review of Middlesbrough’s Local Plan, and the most recent independent population
projections – but Taylor Wimpey stated that they are following the statements made by
Middlesbrough Council in the 2014 documentation.
The Parish Council wondered how the calculation was made that Taylor Wimpey is entitled to
56 out of a total of 250 houses for the whole of Nunthorpe Grange, given the relatively small
proportion of land available to Taylor Wimpey. The Taylor Wimpey representatives replied that
there had been no discussion with Middlesbrough Council about the number of houses to be
built as their share of the Nunthorpe Grange total. They questioned the total of 250, because
they had read in the MasterPlan and the 2018 Local Plan that Middlesbrough Council intended
to increase this total to 350, and the figure of 250 could therefore be regarded as guidance. The
Parish Council queried how this would be possible, as the Planning Inspector had set the limit at
250, and had also ruled that no building could start until there had been significant progress with
the Nunthorpe Park and Ride, but the Taylor Wimpey representatives felt unable to comment on
these matters.
The Parish Council voiced serious concern about access to the estate being from the busy, but
narrow, Guisborough Road. The response was that the proposal had been validated by Taylor
Wimpey’s planning consultants and the “highways authorities”, and fitted into Middlesbrough
Council’s “Highways Model”. The Planning Department of Middlesbrough Council has stated
that it would not wish to prejudice whatever proposal about road access Taylor Wimpey may
wish to make. Taylor Wimpey evaluates that the impact of 56 houses on the road infrastructure
(Guisborough Road and beyond) would not be significant, but the Parish Council
representatives stated that the incremental cumulative impact has become intolerable. The
Taylor Wimpey representatives drew attention to a second point on their plan where the road
through this site linked into the wider Nunthorpe Grange, potentially relieving pressure on
Guisborough Road, but stated that it is not possible for Taylor Wimpey to be more specific about
how this might help until Middlesbrough Council presents a definitive traffic plan for Nunthorpe
Consideration of potential Section 106 community contributions from Taylor Wimpey was
agreed to be premature, in the absence of decisions on the more fundamental issues such as
the number and nature of houses, and the access to the site.
Returning to Taylor Wimpey’s thoughts on integration of their site within the wider context of
Nunthorpe Grange, Taylor Wimpey stated that their website would be updated regularly until the
date of handover.
The Parish Council emphasised the importance of continuing dialogue, even when there is
fundamental disagreement. Taylor Wimpey agreed to keep in contact with the Parish Council.

Have your say about the future of Nunthorpe

As part of the community consultation on the development of Nunthorpe, the Parish Council has convened a special meeting with the sole purpose of providing residents with the opportunity to make their views known. This will be a virtual meeting by Zoom because of the current situation but anyone can join by obtaining details from the Parish Clerk on


Parish Councillors also welcome comments on the “Nunthorpe Vision” introductory leaflet circulated to all residents by Middlesbrough Council, and made available on the Nunthorpe Vision Facebook page.

The Parish Council also encourages feedback on the four minimum requirements presented to Middlesbrough Council by the Parish Council, available on the Nunthorpe Parish Council Facebook page  and the Nunthorpe Vision Facebook page.

Please, please join us to ensure that we can represent your views.

Parish Council Priorities for Nunthorpe Vision

Nunthorpe Parish Council’s opinion is that Nunthorpe has already suffered enough from
housing developments without the infrastructure to help compensate residents for the
environmental implications.

Therefore, although the Parish Council thinks that it is probably unrealistic to expect zero
housebuilding in Nunthorpe Grange by those who have bought land already zoned for
house-building, the Parish Council has presented Middlesbrough Council with the
following four minimum requirements –


NPC seeks a commitment from Middlesbrough Council not to authorise
house-building in Nunthorpe Grange until a comprehensive development plan
has been agreed for the whole of Nunthorpe.

Such a plan must –
Oppose all housing development in Nunthorpe outside Nunthorpe
Grange (such as at Ford Close)
Establish a total number of no more than 250 houses across all of
Nunthorpe Grange, and prioritise accessible housing at
Nunthorpe Grange.
Oppose any subsequent attempt by developers to renegotiate the
number and/or nature of houses in Nunthorpe Grange.


NPC seeks a commitment from Middlesbrough Council not to authorise
housebuilding in Nunthorpe Grange until a comprehensive transport plan,
incorporating an implementation schedule, has been agreed, in order to
alleviate various problems – particularly the “Marton Crawl”
In such a transport plan, an immediate improvement in rail and bus service
should be prioritised over the long-term aspiration for an additional station in


NPC seeks a commitment from Middlesbrough Council to protect and
enhance the green environment of Nunthorpe, including the creation of a new
park in Nunthorpe Grange.


NPC seeks a commitment from Middlesbrough Council not only to facilitate a
Nunthorpe Health Centre, but also to provide –
sufficient land for a comprehensive Community Centre
sufficient funding to enable construction of at least the first phase of
the Community Centre before any housebuilding is started in
Nunthorpe Grange.


NPC seeks a commitment from Middlesbrough Council to protect and enhance the facilities for sport in Nunthorpe.








NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a casual vacancy exists in the office of Parish Councillor for Nunthorpe Parish Councillor Ward of the Borough of Middlesbrough.


An election to fill this vacancy can be requested if a request in writing is given by Ten electors for the Parish area to the Returning Officer, Middlesbrough Council, PO Box 503, Town Hall, Middlesbrough, TS1 9FX. This election would take place in May 2021.


Angela  Livingstone


Date: 10/05/2020



If you are interested in becoming a Parish Councillor by co-option to fill one of the 5 vacancies please contact the clerk.

Email: Telephone 01642 274283

Presentation to Ken Tomlinson

Ken Tomlinson was a member of Nunthorpe Parish Council for seven years until he stepped down at the end of April this year. For most of that time he served as Chair and saw the Council through a very unsettled period in its history at the beginning of his tenure. Thankfully, he now leaves it in fine health.

In recognition of his service to Nunthorpe as Chair, the Parish Council have presented Ken and his wife Lesley (who herself served for many years as Secretary to Nunthorpe Community Council) with an inscribed crystal bowl on behalf of the community.

Thank you Ken for all of your time, effort and commitment to Nunthorpe.

Footpaths around the Grey Towers Estate

The Covid crisis has understandably meant more people walking around our Nunthorpe public rights of ways, footpaths and bridleways, including at Grey Towers.

A public right of way is over land owned by somebody. In the case of the Grey Towers building and adjacent land, the land is owned by the Grey Towers residents.

The public may use rights of way which are highlighted along the route with signage as in the accompanying illustration.

We must all stick to the rules to ensure safety and keep to the two metre-wide path. This includes dogs, which must be kept on leads, as paths go on to farmers fields where there is livestock.

After recent meetings, we wrote to Middlesbrough Council and received an indication of support to work together with residents to seek greater understanding in the future and to see what progress can be made.

We are also working in partnership with OurGreenways in producing a clear map showing paths and rights of ways along with further guidance.

The Parish Council, Ward Councillors and the Grey Towers owners are engaged in discussions and working hard to tackle issues and will keep everyone updated to minimise any misunderstanding.