The result at today’s county Planning Committee was entirely predictable. There is documentary evidence that the Labour Group at County Hall voted unanimously in favour of using Belle Vue for the Academy site even before the Cabinet made its decision last July.

Today the Labour county councillors on the county Planning Committee voted to give outline planning permission for that academy and leisure centre to be built on Belle Vue.

I was immensely impressed by the well put together arguments of the nine local objectors who spoke. I was equally depressed by the cynical attempts of some supporters of the application to imply that the objectors were against the investment in education and leisure in Consett. “Location, location, location,” was how one objector put it. “No-one is against investing £45 million in Consett; just against spending it in the wrong place.”

Some readers will have heard on the radio the “barney” which followed the meeting. The participants were a senior current county council Labour policitician and an equally senior former district council Labour politician. It only goes to show that the choice of site for the new school is not, and should not be, a party political issue. The real disgrace is that no-one who has watched the process believes that it has been aimed at meeting the wishes and expectations of the people of Consett. You, we, are not important.

So the issue will rumble on to the inquiry into the Village Green application for the Belle Vue fields. The best we can hope for is that the people who go to that, supporters and opponents of the village green, believe that their arguments will be listened to impartially, analysed and weighed. That, at least, would be a “first” for them.

It’s important that people watch decision making processes - witnesses are always valuable - so I hope that plenty of people from Consett will take the chance to watch the Planning Committee of Durham County Council deliberate on the Academy and Sports Centre “outline planning application” to build the Academy on Belle Vue.

It’s fortunate that I’m not a member of that committee because any member who has made their mind up before the meeting (it’s called pre-determination) is barred from voting in the meeting. That’s why I had to step outside when the report on the village green enquiry was taking place a week or two ago in the licensing committee.

As a local member, however, I will be able to put residents’ case to the committee and I shall do just that.

Anyone who wants to is free to watch the meeting on Tuesday March 9th at County Hall starting at 2.00 p.m. in the council chamber.

The date by which comments or objections to the Planning Application for the Consett Academy and Leisure Facility should be received is getting close. It’s next Monday, February 8th.

You can see the plans here

You can check the “Saved Plans” for Derwentside which should still guide planning decisions in the district here N.B. the “Expired Plans” no longer have any relevance.

Since Durham County Council doesn’t provide one, you may wish to read the Leeds City Council fact sheet on the requirements for an application for outline planning permission. It is to be found here and provides a useful checklist against which to measure the “outline” planning application.

It can take a while to get your head round this very large application, so don’t delay. It’s important that the planners have as clear an understanding as possible of the views of local people.

Comments should be sent to:
John Byers
Planning Development Manager
Regeneration & Economic Development
County Hall
Durham DH1 5UL
or email to: planningcounty@durham.gov.uk

The plans for the Consett Academy are available to view online here

There’s a massive amount of detail but please don’t be put off, and do read it. In Planning matters ”knowledge is power”. The odds are therefore stacked in favour of the professionals, but local opinion still counts - provided it is relevant.

Tomorrow I will post a summary of things which are allowable planning issues. By sticking to them you can make sure that anything you submit is relevant and has to be taken into account.

Putting in other things which are irrelevant to planning weakens your case, so it’s counter-productive.

Log in tomorrow to find out the things that will make a difference.

I was driving away from Consett on Thursday morning when I got a call from a local resident asking me if I was going to the meeting about Watling Woods at the Civic Centre. It was the planning appeal against Derwentside’s refusal to grant planning permission for a double glazing factory to be built on part of the wood.

I was going to a different meeting, but unable to make a choice as I had not been told of the Watling Woods appeal meeting. I’m disappointed about that, but it’s symptomatic of the difficulty of communication across our district.

As a result I was unable to give much information to another resident who rang to ask me if the result was known. It isn’t, but for anyone else who is interested in the story, you can read about it here on the Journal Live website. As you will read there the decision is expected by the end of October.

Not many people are interested in “Planning” - until it affects them, because they want to put up a conservatory, or protest about the conservatory their neighbour is going to put up.

It’s one of the things which has been dealt with at the district council, and one effect of that has been that local knowledge has been brought to bear on planning issues. Sometimes councillors’ knowledge of the roads or the history of a site can be really useful.

Moving to a single council for the whole county will affect that.

There are far too many planning decisions for just one Durham committee, and anyway, that would lose the effectiveness of local knowledge.

What is being planned, therefore, is three committees, and the one in this area will include Chester-le-Street, Consett, Stanley and Lanchester.

The cabinet has proposed that each committee should be 16 strong, with eight councillors coming from the area itself, and eight drafted in from the rest of the county.

I and other Lib Dems think that is the wrong balance. It would be better to have a higher proportion of local members for two reasons:

1. Their local knowledge can be useful in the discussion
2. They will be more motivated to turn up to meetings than councillors from outside the area

Mind you, it’s more complicated than it seems because there is a requirement for all council committees to reflect the balance of the political parties in the county. That means that the Durham City and Easington committee will have to draft in some Conservatives from outside as none were elected in those areas.

It’s a good job our Lib Dem leader, Nigel Martin, was a senior lecturer in the Maths Department at Durham University. He’s been working on a pretty tricky matrix. I’m just hoping the cabinet will listen to the experts or we could end up in something of a mess.

There’s something scary about the sound of “Biomass”.

According to what I read, however, that is a wrong interpretation. Biomass is defined as, “Material that is derived from living, or recently living biological organisms. In the energy context it is often used to refer to plant material, however by-products and waste from livestock farming, food processing and preparation and domestic organic waste, can all form sources of biomass. With such a wide range of material potentially described as biomass, the range of methods to process it must be equally broad.”

The current planning application for Biomass storage by Waste Not Green Recycling Limited at Bunker Hill Farm, Medomsley Road, is quite clear that the firm currently recycles (generally by composting) green materials from recognised sources such as local authorities, parks and gardens. As I understand it, that is mostly the garden waste of those people lucky enough to have brown-lidded bins throughout Derwentside.

The new storage facility requested, however, seems to be for shredded material from wooden logs which will be shredded on site and stored in a steel agricultural shed pending redistribution in the area.

New access facilities are planned to replace the narrow unmade-up road road which runs from Medomsley Road to Bunker Hill. Instead the access will be through Number One Industrial Estate and Werdohl Way. That is clearly a much safer access if this proposal goes ahead.

The whole application is to be found at http://www.derwentside.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=8427&step=4&ref=1/2008/0776

The most interesting document, from my point of view, is the “supporting statement” at http://www.planning.derwentside.gov.uk/planning/08-0776/designandaccess.pdf Amongst the claims in that document is one that the amount of biomass material supplied by the development will offset around 4,000 tonnes of carbon per year.

As always, interested parties are able to see the plans and make responses to them by visiting Derwentside District Council’s Planning Department at the Civic Centre.

Planning approval is being sought for a change to Christchurch. Here’s the proposed new look.

When you are out and about in the next few days have a look and check if you are right about what the change is.

Alternatively you could cheat and look at an earlier story on this blog at http://owentemple.mycouncillor.org.uk/2008/05/13/spot-the-difference/ 

I’m a bit bemused by the whole saga as the current plan looks remarkably like the original one (which was over a year ago and which which failed to gain the planners’ favour), and marginally more intrusive that the one featured in May in my previous “spot the difference” item.

Ah well, I didn’t object to that one and I don’t object to this. If you do, however, you need to make your feelings known at the Planning Department at Consett Civic Centre.

The long running saga of Glenroyd House and its planning application takes another step as the Development Control Committee’s (DCC) decision to reject its last application has been taken to appeal.

To date:

August 2007 the DCC declined an application to change the whole site to offices, hosted by Derwentside CVS, on the grounds that the only vehicular access, Larch Street, (a very narrow road that runs between Glenroyd House and the terrace of Medomsley Road) was inadequate and dangerous.

Nov 2008: Appeal lodged against the planning refusal.

Jan 2008: Appeal withdrawn and new planning application submitted with car parking at the front and shared access with Rosemount home for the elderly through an enlarged opening at the front.

Application accepted subject to limits on working hours and provision of plans for car-parking.

June 2008: Third Application submitted seeking to vary the terms of the planning approval as Rosemount had declined to share access with CVS/Glenroyd. The application involved creating a completely new access alongside the Rosemount entrance.

Application rejected by DCC on grounds of pedestrian and traffic safety.

Ag 2008: Appeal

Those who wish to make representations would be well advised first to consult the file at Derwentside Civic Centre any day Monday to Friday between 8.30 a.m. and 4.45 p.m.

They should then make their submission by September 9th (sending three copies) to

The Planning Inspectorate, Temple Quay House, 3/19a Eagle Wing, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN

You must quote ref: APP/V/1315/A/08/2080021/NWF

I looked for it on the planning appeal portal but couldn’t find it, so I guess it will have to be a pen and ink job.

Whilst this new Conservation area appraisal is titled “Blackhill”, it will be of great interest to people living in Consett North ward, especially those who live on Aynsley Terrace, much of which is in the conservation area.  

Of course, it is also very important to all of us who live in and value this beautiful and historic area.

It’s a substantial document which you can access at http://www.derwentside.gov.uk/getmedia.cfm?mediaid=9897 (but even with broadband it will be very slow to load) and covers a wide range of issues from planning controls to the history of the area, from tree preservation to the architectural heritage. The purpose of it is to create a public debate about what is most important to protect, and what is detracting from or threatens the area.

The development plans team want your suggestions and comments and to enable that there is a “Public Workshop” in Blackhill Community Centre on Monday 29th from 6.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. If you can’t make it to that you can still give your input by filling in the comments sheet which you can download from http://www.derwentside.gov.uk/getmedia.cfm?mediaid=9899

Of particular interest to some people will be the proposed new boundaries which you can see in the plan on page 10 of the document. The bits that have been excluded are marked in blue, with the addition of a large part of the cemetery marked in salmon pink. Alternatively click on the image of the plan to enlarge it.

For further details email developmentplans@derwentside.gov.uk