We, the residents of North Tyneside, call on the Council to strengthen protection of greenfield and Green Belt land in the 2026 Local Plan.

Green Belt boundaries are being eroded at an alarming rate. They should not be reduced; instead, they should be expanded to include highly sensitive sites with strong local opposition, protecting village character and preventing further loss of green space. One example — though not the only one — is the Land East of North Villas and North of Meadowbank Dudley Northumberland (known locally as Annitsford Farm Field). Residents have fought for generations to preserve this land due to its importance to village identity. Despite being allocated for housing since 2015 and earlier Local Plans, it has not yet received planning permission, has faced planning withdrawal in the past, and remains unprotected by Green Belt designation while once again facing imminent development pressure. 

Green belts were designed to stop urban sprawl, prevent towns from merging, safeguard the countryside, preserve historic character, and assist urban regeneration. But now they are being used unnecessarily as viable options to build on, and sites that should be listed as green belt are not yet under its protection. They should not even be used as a "last resort" - they are there for very valid reasons and should be respected. 

North Tyneside is a very small borough with limited land capacity. Current housing allocations overwhelmingly favour low‑density private homes (typically detached or semi‑detached) despite clear evidence that this does not reflect genuine local need. We cannot continue adopting land‑hungry development models more suited to areas with far greater space. New housing should prioritise high‑density development on brownfield land such as former industrial estates, including terraced homes, flats, and multi‑storey schemes that accommodate diverse needs (e.g., accessible ground‑floor units, then dedicated floors for older residents, families, and single occupants). The former 1970s Killingworth Towers, while flawed in construction, is an example of how high‑density housing could work effectively if designed to modern standards. Detached and semi‑detached homes should still be built, but de‑prioritised to protect land use and reflect genuine demographic need.

Infrastructure must also be addressed before further development. Many villages cannot cope with sudden and expansive population increases, with rising road accidents, sewage failures, long waiting lists, and pressure on other essential services. Infrastructure improvements should be delivered before new homes are approved, not as an afterthought.

The borough already has sufficient private housing under construction and on the market, with thousands of homes often waiting months to sell or rent. What is urgently needed is genuinely affordable, social, and council housing — delivered in forms that minimise land take and protect the environment, as it is clear that an increase in housing supply does not decrease house cost or value, evidenced by hundreds of locations where large housing developments have gone ahead yet house prices continue to rise. 

New homes should also incorporate low‑cost off‑grid energy such as solar, small wind turbines, or water‑powered micro‑generation, where possible, to reduce household bills and support climate resilience.

Residents are increasingly concerned that the Council is refusing to adopt green spaces in new developments, forcing households to pay private maintenance fees for basic services such as grass cutting and weed control. In a cost‑of‑living crisis, this is unacceptable. It must be confirmed that green spaces in new and existing developments (unless part of a luxury private estate) will be adopted and maintained through council tax as usual.

We therefore request that the Council:

• Review all unbuilt greenfield and Green Belt allocations in the current draft Local Plan.
• Remove or de‑allocate sites where brownfield alternatives exist or where proposals do not prioritise social or council housing (such as in the above example).
• Expand Green Belt protections to include sensitive sites with ecological value, flood risk, or sustained community opposition.
• Adopt a brownfield‑first, high‑density strategy for all future development.
• Apply stricter criteria to greenfield proposals (especially on sites that are green belt protected or used for crop production) including mandatory Environmental Impact Assessments for major developments (10+ homes).
• Give significant weight to local views, especially those of immediate residents and smaller villages, ensuring voices are heard and matter during planning consultations.
• Prioritise infrastructure improvements — including roads, GPs, schools, dentists, energy, sewage, flood mitigation, and small business support, among others — before approving new developments.
• Confirm adoption of all non‑private green spaces to ensure maintenance is covered by council tax.
• Support off‑grid energy options such as solar, micro‑wind, and water‑turbine systems for new housing schemes.

Excessive greenfield development is causing avoidable and irreversible harm, reducing agricultural land, increasing flood risk, causing environmental damage, damaging mental and physical wellbeing, and eroding the identity of our communities. A renewed commitment to protecting green spaces, delivering genuinely affordable housing, and prioritising sustainable brownfield regeneration is essential for a fair and future‑proof Local Plan.

Thank you.