A PRUDHOE planning application which was refused in March has been approved after a review, prompting ill feeling among local residents.

The planning application from Isos to knock down 15 garages and build four new homes in their place, on land west of Linnheads, was rejected at a meeting of Northumberland County Council’s planning committee on March 28.

But it was brought back before the committee on April 25, after officers recommended that they review their reasons for refusal.

The robustness and sustainability of the three reasons were not believed to strong enough to hold up in an appeal, risking costs to the council.

Members had rejected it on three grounds; the loss of green space, the loss of parking spaces, and that the development would not achieve the separation distances and private amenity space required by local planning policies.

A distance of 25 metres is required between the backs of new two-storey dwellings and existing dwellings.

The plans cited a distance of 21 metres, but officers considered that the proposed dwellings would be in keeping with the scale of those in the surrounding area.

The committee agreed to withdraw all previous refusal reasons, and was minded to approve the application.

Eight councillors voted for approval, while two voted against.

Prudhoe town councillor Eileen Burt, who spoke out against the development at the March meeting, also attended part of the meeting last week.

She said: “I was pleased last time that members had been persuaded, rightly or wrongly, to not approve the application but I also knew that they said the grounds were weak.

“I am very disappointed. I spoke to a resident this morning about it and have been in touch with others and they are very disappointed too.”

Ottercops resident Richard Stokoe said: “The garages are on my back door and the houses will directly affect me.

“I understand them saying some of the reasons were weak, but it contravenes the planning regulations of a 25 metres distance between properties.

“They overturned their own decision because they were frightened of being hit with costs.”