Concerns about a potential anthrax outbreak failed to put the brakes on a new 246 home housing scheme for Whitby.
A heated debate this afternoon at town hall , lasting more than two hours, saw a number of people come forward to object to the application at High Stakesby.
Among the concerns were those that an anthrax contaminated cow was buried on the land at Sneaton Castle in the 1950s.
This was one of the many reasons put forward why permission should not be granted for the site, which lies outside the town’s permitted development zone.
Whitby ward councillor Jane Kenyon-Miller told her fellow councillors: “This is probably the most serious and longstanding decision you will ever make for Whitby’”
The report, which went before Scarborough Council’s planning and development committee recommended that outline planning permission for the 246 homes and 80-bed care home, be approved by councillors.
York-based developers S Harrison submitted the planning application to the council which will see massive development on the greenfield site at Sneaton Castle Farm.
It is the latest in a series of proposals put forward for the site over recent years, which belongs to the sisters from the Order of the Holy Paraclete, based at Sneaton Castle.
The plans were for a mixture of two, three and four bedroom houses and 21 bungalows; 40 per cent of the homes would be classed as ‘affordable’.
A number of these would have been managed by Tees Valley Housing Association offering social rent, affordable rent, shared ownership and rent to buy schemes.
Access to the site was originally opposite Runswick Avenue but after consultation with planners it will be slightly offset and a second access point off Castle Road.
More than 360 objections to the scheme were submitted to the council.
One of those, Helen Barker, told the meeting that: “Do not dismiss us as mere NIMBYs.
“These homes would have a grave effect on Whitby and people do not want them here.”
However, Cllr John Blackburn said: “Whatever we vote today this site will be built on, that’s a fact, I have no alternative but to support this scheme.”
Councillors voted 8 to 5 in favour of the plans.