![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0_NORMANBY-HIGH-FARM-CGI.jpg\")
<\/p>\nThe Normanby High Farm site straddles three wards – Normanby, Teesville and South Bank<\/p>\n
A CGI of the proposed housing development(Image: Strata\/RCBC)<\/p>\n
A developer has promised more than \u00a31m for local communities after planning permission was granted for 234 new homes.<\/p>\n
The proposed development at Normanby<\/a> High Farm, within the wards of Normanby, Teesville<\/a> and South Bank<\/a>, is intended to be a mix of two, three and four bedroom properties with a revised layout also being agreed. The main vehicular access will be via Skippers Lane, while a pedestrian link will be provided to the existing Keepmoat Homes development located at the south eastern corner of the site.<\/p>\n A planning statement previously submitted to Redcar and Cleveland Council<\/a> on behalf of applicant Strata described the land to be built on as privately owned and vacant consisting of scrub and scattered trees. It said the proposed properties would be designed to a high specification and in a \u201ccontemporary style\u201d, while the site itself was also in a \u201chighly sustainable\u201d location.<\/p>\n The \u00a31.1m in so-called section 106 payments was referenced by representatives of the developer at a meeting of the council\u2019s regulatory committee, which approved the plans. It will go towards increasing the number of school places in the area, health provision and providing upgraded leisure facilities.<\/p>\n The ten hectare site had been allocated for development in the council\u2019s Local Plan, although it originally only envisaged about 150 new homes with a community woodland also being established. This latter element has been dropped in the current plans, although areas of open space, creating a \u201ccentral heart\u201d to the new estate have been incorporated in its design.<\/p>\n A number of objections were raised against the plans by members of the public, 81 in total. Meanwhile, speaking at the meeting, Normanby ward councillor Curt Pugh<\/a> said he feared existing road capacity was not fit for such a development. He said: \u201cThe total number of houses should be reduced.\u201d<\/p>\n An aerial view of the site with the red outline showing where the housing is planned and (inset) Councillor Curt Pugh(Image: DPP Planning\/RCBC)<\/p>\n He also claimed the application had \u201csignificant flaws\u201d and predicted \u201cgridlock\u201d, adding: \u201cGiven the existing issues with road access\/potential congestion and a lack of local education places this application should be revised – I can\u2019t see how more than 91 properties is acceptable.\u201d<\/p>\n An amended transport assessment accompanying the plans calculated that there would be 173 two-way vehicle trips during peak morning hours generated and 181 two-way vehicle trips in the evening peak.<\/p>\n Cllr Pugh said the section 106 funds would not resolve his highways concern, but they were, of course, welcome. He said: \u201cThe key will be ensuring that the funding is actually spent in the area and not in a completely different part of the borough – unfortunately the council has a track record of doing that.\u201d<\/p>\n Another council member, Neil Bendelow, who represents South Bank, wrote in his objection that there would be \u201cmore strain on local roads\u201d, while secondary schools in the area were currently over subscribed. A council officer report recommending that planning permission be granted said the application site was within stated development limits and considered to be in a sustainable location.<\/p>\n Referencing the number of houses planned, it said it was important for members to consider the current position of the Local Plan<\/a> – which is due for renewal – and policies in relation to the national planning policy framework and the Government’s position in relation to housing growth which has seen annual completion targets ramped up in Redcar and Cleveland<\/a>.<\/p>\n To find all the planning applications, traffic diversions, road layout changes, alcohol licence applications and more in your Teesside community, visit the Public Notices Portal.<\/a><\/p>\n The council\u2019s development engineers had no objection to the plans, subject to conditions, although there were concerns raised over the capacity of the junction of Skippers Lane and Ormesby<\/a> Road, via which all vehicles coming to and from the development would have to travel.<\/p>\n They said, at the request of the council, a scheme to provide a dedicated left and right turn lane on Skippers Lane, at its junction with Ormesby Road, had been proposed as part of the development and this \u201cpiece of mitigation\u201d to be secured by way of condition had been accepted.<\/p>\n In respect of agreed financial contributions, the report said, after representations from the various parties involved, the suggested heads of terms was \u00a3426,998 towards a \u2018mainstream place contribution\u2019 for education; \u00a3249,808 towards special educational needs; \u00a3113,002 towards the NHS<\/a> and providing additional capacity at Manor House Surgery; \u00a3209,784 towards Eston<\/a> Leisure Centre; \u00a362,500 towards local play facilities and \u00a346,800 towards the Teesmouth and Cleveland Coast Special Protection Area.<\/p>\n Did you know you can make Teesside Live a preferred source of Teesside news in Google, which will mean you get more of our breaking news, exclusives, and must-read stories straight away? Here’s more information<\/a> about what this means and how to do it – you can also do it by clicking here<\/a>.<\/p>\n![\"An](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0_JRR_MGA_210226curtfarmjfif.jpg\")
<\/p>\n