© Copyright Colin Edgar and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence.
The Foundation Hospital trust, which runs County Durham’s Acute Hospitals and currently owns Shotley Bridge Hospital, has made a joint statement with the Primary Care Trust which is responsible for planning to meet the health needs of local people.
The good news is that in the short term they have agreed:
- To have a long term plan for Shotley by April 2008
- That in the meantime no changes are planned to Shotley’s services
The long term is still not clear, though in an interesting move they have started discussions about whether Shotley Bridge Community Hospital should continue to be owned by the Foundation Trust or should become owned by the Primary Care Trust.
I have received a letter from the Chief Executive of the PCT writing about Shotley Hospital in which she states, “the intention is to work with a range of stakeholders including staff, public and the district and county councils to plan the future”. You can bet your bottom dollar that I’ll be working to make sure that that happens. I’m confident that you’ll be doing the same.
The accountancy practice which applied for a change of use at 279 Medomsley Road has appealed against the council’s decision to refuse the application.
Basic details of the case can be seen at Derwentside District Councils website on http://www.derwentside.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=8427&step=4&ref=1/2007/0614 . Full details and all papers relating to the case can be viewed by appointment at the Council Offices.
Many local residents have objected to the proposals on the grounds of increased traffic in the back street and parking difficulties, which is fundamentally why the planning committee turned it down.
If you want to make your opinions known to the Planning Inspectorate, you should first visit the council offices to make sure you have a good grasp of the issues, and particularly the grounds of appeal which hinge around:
- Disputing that the change of use will increase traffic or parking problems
- Stating that the traffic dangers have been overstated
- Arguing that local residents had not claimed “loss of amenity” and that that was a ground for refusal “concocted” by council officers.
Communication with the Planning Inspectorate about this case can be made on paper or electronically through http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/ViewCase.asp?casename=APP/V1315/A/07/2058102&caseaddress=COO.2036.300.2.8879612
Derwentside District Councillors voted tonight in favour of setting up a “community initiative fund” to be allocated on a ward by ward basis, and with the aim of enhancing the physical fabric of the community. It is intended to average out at £20,000 per councillor across the district and will be worth £1.25 million overall.
Whilst very welcome, I expressed one concern. If the rule “only one project per ward” is applied strictly it may result in sensible smaller projects being missed and “grandiose schemes” being preferred to use up the allocation.
As I pointed out, it’s not very logical that a £20,000 project will be perfectly aceptable in Consett East because that ward only has one councillor, whereas on the other side of Sherburn Terrace in Consett North we’ll have to spend £60,000 at a go because we are a three member ward!
Further details will be produced in a second report and I’ll keep you informed of what comes out of it.
In the meantime you may have some thoughts on the issue. Please let me have them.
One final aside. As the rules stand all three councillors will have to agree on just one project. Now that really will be a test of coalition government!
This week’s Development Control meeting on Thursday December 13th at 2.00 p.m. sees Glenroyd House return to the agenda.
In August an application to turn the whole building into offices, accessed just via the narrow sidestreet (called Larch Street), was knocked back unanimously by the Development Control Committee. That decision is now under appeal at the Planning Inspectorate.
The new application is for a much more limited use of the building and would involve the Derwentside Council for Voluntary Service and the Citizens Advice Bureau using a smaller part of the building for their office activities. Crucially the application proposes a new shared access with Rosemount Care Home. This is a much safer access as it is sited away from the bend and can be made wider than the Larch Street access.
This, allied to the greatly reduced number of rooms to be used (and therefore reduced numbers of staff and visitors) makes the application much more acceptable in my eyes. If you want to look at it and make your own judgement, just click this link: http://www.derwentside.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=8427&step=4&ref=1/2007/0901
Even though the application is much better than the previous one, however, I have written to ask the committee consider two additional conditions. One is that the hours of operation are limited to 8.30 a.m. to 6.00 p.m.. The other is that the rear entrance onto Larch Street has locked gates. The application says that fewer than two delivery and maintenance vehicles a week will us the Larch Street entrance; in that case, only locked gates will prevent other users from using this inadequate access and causing the problems that caused residents so much distress over the original application.
As its secretary, I attended the regular monthly “first Tuesday” meeting of the Berry Edge Residents Association on December 4th. The meeting sought to progress two items that have been on the agenda regularly during the life of the association: the parkland and waste ground to the rear of Albert Road, and some arrangement to make it easier for people to cross busy Albert Road.
Berry Edge Gardens
The meeting received an outline of the joint partnership between the residents association and Groundwork West Durham and Darlington to transform the area into “Berry Edge Gardens”. The first step is to seek an Awards for All grant from the Big Lottery fund to organise consultation with residents and draw up proposals for greening the whole area, part of which is currently a wasteland.
Crossing Albert Road
On the issue of a possible island or other arrangement to ease the crossing of Albert Road, especially for the elderly, infirm, or parents with young children, County Councillor Clive Robson had received results of a second traffic survey on Albert Road. On average 5639 vehicles per day had used the road of which around 105 recorded speeds above the limit. The written report by the highway engineer raised a number of problems with regard to possible solutions and offered little positive hope. Councillor Robson would seek further information from him, however, in the hope of being able to move this forward.
The next meeting of Berry Edge Residents association will be on January 8th, 7.00 p.m. at the YMCA in Parliament Street.
Derwentside Lib Dems put out the following press release today:
“Lib Dems have distributed two and a half thousand of Derwentside’s recycling information “wheels” in Consett. The clever little device tells people exactly what they can and can’t put in their twin-bins, and is a must for everyone keen to improve their recycling. If you want one too, ring Derwentside’s customer services on 01207 693693. “Councillor Owen Temple met some confusion on the doorstep while handing out the wheels. People were especially surprised that they must NOT put plastic supermarket bags in their wheeled bins, the opposite of what they were once told. It turns out it’s because some people had put dog dirt and soiled nappies in plastic bags in the recycling bins which was completely unfair on the workers who have to sort the recycling materials. “Commenting, Councillor Temple said, “I’m sure that if people knew about their fellow citizens who have to sort out the recycling waste, they would make even more effort to get it right.”
At last the government has got something right on this whole unitary debacle. We know they got it wrong when they believed the County Council’s claim that local people wanted just one “super-county” council for the whole of County Durham, but give them some credit – they spotted something fishy in the way the County Council was trying to change its proposal after the event.
As a result we will have elections in May 2008 to elect new councillors to shape the direction of the all new, all singing, all dancing council! These councillors will then continue as members for the first four years of the new council, meaning that they will be elected for five years in total.
Whichever side you were on, for unitary or against it, we should all be pleased that the setting up of the new council will not be left in the hands of its original architects. We need a breath of fresh air to blow through County Hall.
Effective date: November 28th 2007
Well done Healeyfield Parish Council for organising a meeting to explore the future of our very valuable local hospital, and well done Laura Robson, Edmund Lovell and John Arthurs for venturing out to Derwentside to hear what local people think of the run down they feel is going on.
The packed meeting made its feelings very clear, and if assurances were few and far between, at least these senior personnel from the Acute Hospital Trust will be very clear on local opinion;
- Local people believe that the facilities at Shotley are deliberately being run down by the Acute Hospital Trust
- To a man and woman it is determined that people in Derwentside should continue to be served by the facility
- People want their elderly relatives and friends to get their post-operation recovery care at Shotley Bridge, not shipped out round the county. They are angry at the closure of Ward 4 which leaves insufficient beds to cater for Derwentside patients
- People want the day surgery provision to be maintained and extended. They do not believe that Derwentside is unique in the country in having a declining need for Day Surgery
- We want assurances that the Minor injury unit will be retained
Now the District Council needs to play an equally public role in insisting on making the voice of local people be heard in the stakeholder group consultation which the Primary Care Trust has promised to undertake. You can be assured that I will be pressing the District Council to make good its promise of all-party inclusion in that group.
Effective date: November 13th 2007:
Liberal Democrats are completely behind the need for renewed sports facilities in Consett. The Swimming Pool is very close to (if not beyond) the end of its useful life. The Leisure Centre is, at the least, in need of substantial refurbishment. That’s why this debate is so important, and it remains vital that all options, and their costs and potential sources of funding are seriously considered. What it doesn’t mean is that the “Consett Sports Village” plans previously proposed are either right or affordable.
Unfortunately if you are looking for facts on this page you will be disappointed. That’s because your councillors have been gagged by the council’s decision to exclude press and public from the recent debates on this topic.
As leader of the Liberal Democrat group I led the attempt to open the meeting to you and the press. We were supported in this by Independent members.
Sadly, the Labour Group used their majority to exclude you from the meeting and the information by 25 votes to 24.
As a result all you are allowed to know is the mixture of truth and half truth you can read in the press. It seems that’s the way your council prefers it.
Welcome to Owen Temple’s website. As Liberal Democrat councillor for Consett North ward I am committed to keeping you informed about what’s going on locally in the council and on the street.
New to using a website I hope that over time I will get better at the technology, and the value and quality of what I can offer lean heavily on the use you make of it and the feedback you give me.