'This is our Sycamore Gap' - Campaigners react as 143 trees will be felled to demolish South Tyneside College

Campaigns bidding to save healthy and mature trees at the current South Tyneside College site have slammed the decision to allow them to be felled.
Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now

During a South Tyneside Council Planning Committee meeting on Monday, December 18, councillors approved an application from Avant Homes to build around 260 homes on the current South Tyneside College site.

As part of these plans, 143 of 283 individual trees on the site, just off St George's Avenue, will be felled to allow for the demolition work.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Many of the trees are protected by preservation orders, with concerns even raised by the Council’s tree team about the issue.

There were a total of 185 objections to the development, including from South Shields MP Emma Lewell-Buck, local councillors and residents.

Colin Porter, a member of South Tyneside Tree Action Group (STTAG), set up an online and written petition to save the trees on the current South Tyneside College site - which received more than 5,000 combined signatures.

He has been leading the campaign alongside Green Party Councillor, Rachael Milne, to oppose the felling of the trees.

South Tyneside Tree Action Group (STTAG) are urging Avant Homes to reconsider felling the trees. Photo: Other 3rd Party.South Tyneside Tree Action Group (STTAG) are urging Avant Homes to reconsider felling the trees. Photo: Other 3rd Party.
South Tyneside Tree Action Group (STTAG) are urging Avant Homes to reconsider felling the trees. Photo: Other 3rd Party.
Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Colin has told the Shields Gazette of about his "disappointment" over the Committee's decision to approve the housing development plans.

The 64-year-old said: "We had a small victory at the beginning of our campaign, saving 13 trees on Grosvenor Road but we are still bitterly disappointed that 143 are going to be lost.

"All they had to do was to go back and revise the plans in order to save a lot more trees, all it would have took would be a few less houses.

"I am disappointed and devastated that seven Labour Planning Committee members granted permission against the five who opposed it.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

"The agenda given to us on arrival to yesterday's meeting sent alarm bells ringing due to the fact that the first planning application to be discussed was the development of the new College campus.

"How could we discuss that before the approval of the demolition of the current College, which was the third thing on the agenda?

"From the off, we just knew that it was a done deal."

Read South Tyneside's news on the go with our free email newsletters - bringing the headlines to your inbox. Catch up on the day's news and sport and enjoy even more from your Gazette. Visit our website here to find out more and sign up.

Cllr Milne, for the Biddick and All Saints Ward, voiced her opposition to the plans during Monday's meeting and has slammed the councillors who approved the plans.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

She commented: "It was a sad day for South Tyneside, these trees all have tree preservation orders and I feel like this is our Sycamore Gap x143.

"The Labour councillors who voted to approve these environmentally destructive plans should be deeply ashamed.

"There were 185 objections so how can residents now take South Tyneside Council's climate and ecological emergency declaration seriously when they have sanctioned colossal healthy tree loss.

"I feel like it is all talk from them and this was the perfect opportunity to show that things would be different at South Tyneside Council.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

"The only way that things will actually change now is for people to come out and vote on May 2, 2024, because the same type of propositions will just keep getting put through time and time again."

During Monday's meeting, a representative from Avant Homes said the company “acknowledged the strength of feeling” around the future of existing trees on the site and stressed the scheme had been redesigned in response to concerns.

When the decision was finally made in the council chamber it was greeted by boos from those attending in the public gallery, along with shouts of “shame on you.”