Plans for 179 homes receive over 200 objections
GooglePlans for up to 179 homes and a community centre have drawn more than 200 objections, mostly relating to traffic issues.
TCC Land has applied for outline planning permission to build on two fields near Sandy Lane West, Billingham.
Objectors said it would cause gridlock around school times, raising fears the development could worsen congestion and be an "accident waiting to happen" if approved.
The developer said it could support employment and affordable housing. It declined to comment on the objections submitted to Stockton Borough Council.
Residents also raised concerns about the environmental impact, sewage, overcrowding, overdevelopment, property values, construction disruption, noise, air quality and crime.
Consultancy firm Lichfields' submitted a planning statement which said the visual effect of the homes would "not normally be considered to be significant", according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service.
"It is considered that the application site represents a suitable and logical location for residential development," a statement said.
"There are no strong reasons for refusing development and the benefits of the proposals clearly outweigh any limited harm."
'Important green buffer'
TCC Land has said the homes could generate just over £8m towards new affordable housing and over £1.1m towards infrastructure.
Conservative councillors David Reynard and Marcus Vickers wrote that the developments would be "the precedent and starting gun for a domino effect of coalescing of communities".
They said: "There will be a significant and detrimental impact to traffic, congestion, children's safety and resident wellbeing should the development go ahead without the appropriate traffic infrastructure in place.
"We have seen the proposed benefits sold by the developer and would take these 'with a pinch of salt' in that the material benefits will not be felt by the local community, if anything significant harm will instead be felt by the local community."
Wolviston Parish Council also objected, citing harm to the landscape, environmental and infrastructure, destruction of an "important green buffer", setting an "undesirable precedent", pressure on amenities, traffic and road safety.
