New business group enters debate on Ponteland green belt housing row

BUSINESS people in a sought- after North East community are being asked for their views on controversial housing plans in the hope of providing support for the plans.

Public protests have been held against plans to build 780 new homes at Ponteland and Darras Hall, which campaigners claim will destroy protected green belt land surrounding the upmarket community.

Now a new business-led organisation has been launched in a bid to provide some “balance” in what some see as a one-sided debate, dominated by green belt campaigners.

The Ponteland Business Network (PBN) will hold its inaugural meeting next week in a bid to gauge the opinion of local business people about the housing development plans being proposed by the Lugano Group and Banks Developments.

Yesterday, PBN founder Matt Gray, who owns Ponteland carpet and flooring business Bonner and White, said he can see significant benefits coming from the controversial projects, and wants to know if others share his views.

The Tyneside-based Lugano Group wants to build 280 homes at Birney Hill in a £96m development, which it says will create 672 construction jobs and a further 228 in the region.

Lugano, which owns the 2,500-acre Dissington Estate at Ponteland, says its scheme will pump £4.4m into the local economy and has promised a community benefits package totaling £16m if it goes ahead.

At the same time, Banks Developments is working on plans for 500 homes at Clickemin Farm, east of Ponteland.

Two months ago, more than 300 supporters of the Ponteland Green Belt Group handed out 5,000 information packs to local homes in support of its campaign against the building plans.

The group – which last week claimed Lugano is “more interested in profit margins than job creation” – has also staged a demonstration outside a public exhibition of the company’s plans. Hexham MP Guy Opperman and local Conservative county councillors are also hostile to the plans.

Yesterday, Mr Gray said the PBN has been set up to give the hundreds of local business people in the area more of a voice. He said the proposed redevelopment of Ponteland’s Merton Way shopping centre appears to be going nowhere, and there is a need for new investment in the community, and a boost for local business.

He said: “I believe the green belt views need to be balanced a bit because there has been huge amounts of negativity. Lugano is talking about £16m for the community and that is more than anyone else is putting on the table. It could be used to improve roads, sewage systems, transport and infrastructure.

“On the whole, I think these development proposals are pretty good and a positive thing, but I’m only one businessman. Our inaugural meeting will allow us to find out how other businesses view these developments.”

The meeting – which is by invitation only and limited to 120 attendees – will be held in Ponteland Memorial Hall on April 26, when representatives of development company Arch and the North East Chamber of Commerce will be in attendance.

Source: Journal Live 

Ponteland Wake up Call

Ponteland this is your ‘Wake Up Call’

Hands off our Greenbelt !!!!!!

Now the gloves are off and the consultation process begins. Northumberland County Council have notified residents of the outline planning application  13/00132/OUTES click here

The appropriate advertisement has been put in place  locally and a public notice in the newspaper for the development of 280 houses at Birney Hill Farm.

You need to ACT NOW, don’t wait, or leave it to others. HAVE YOUR SAY

Watch out for our information pack which is being delivered as you read this, over the next couple of days.

There is a quick objection letter and plenty of information for those who wish to personalise their replies. Download extra copies for everyone in the household, that includes children of any age. 

Use the envelope which has been provided, pre labelled, either post or we have two addresses: 93 Cheviot View and 17 Darras Road that will accept your envelope and will deliver them, by the deadline to County Hall, Morpeth.

Don’t think this proposed development is NOT going to affect you, it won’t matter where you live in Ponteland, it will have an adverse impact on your day to day life. If it is concreted over, that is it-it’s gone forever! and don’t think it stops there the door will be wide open for other speculative developers to follow

Take Note this is an Outline Application for 280 houses on the Birney Hill identified site the layout was an example of where the houses “could be built”

The Community needs to come together and respond before it is too late

Deadline 11^th March

Ponteland Greenbelt Group

DEBATE OVER FUTURE OF GREEN BELT EXPOSES DEEP DIVISIONS

THINK of Tynedale and you think of the countryside, wildlife and tranquility.

Some, however, fear the area’s unique character could be placed under threat as more and more developers eye up its green belt land for housing.

In Hexham, residents face potential development at Shaws Farm, off West Road, while residents of the tiny hamlet of New Ridley have petitioned against a 22-home scheme.

Ponteland, meanwhile, looks set to bear the brunt of the recent upsurge in interest, with proposals coming forward for 280 homes at Birney Hill and a further 500 at Clickemin Farm, either side of the A695.

Residents, though, have proved they’re no pushover, organising everything from protests to an eye-catching signpost campaign to signal their opposition.

“Ponteland is a unique settlement – it’s neither a village nor a town – and the surrounding green belt has been a designated area for over 30 years,” said Alma Dunigan, chairman of the recently-established Ponteland Green Belt Group.

“If it’s concreted over, that is it – it’s gone forever.

“Developers choose green belt land as their favoured option due to the low costs in preparation, the weaknesses in the planning policies of Northumberland County and the radical change to national planning policy.

“We must not lose sight of why developers are interested in building hundreds of houses here and now: for profit.”

The developers, however, tell a different story, most pointing to an apparent housing shortfall in Northumberland, particularly for first-time buyers.

The county is expected to make provision for 18,000 to 19,000 new homes by 2030, 7,000 of which are to be built in the south-west.

Lugano Group, which hopes to build at Birney Hill, Ponteland, has also pointed out that green belt is not a permanent feature, but can be amended if there is a need to do so.

The company says this has already happened on several occasions in Ponteland, between 1981 and 2003, when Fairney Edge, Eland Haugh and Medburn were all removed from the designation.

“The same issues apply today,” a spokesman said.

“Lugano has undertaken several years of research, working with professional organisations and Northumberland County Council.

“The evidence from this detailed work concludes that there are no other credible alternatives but to release green belt for development.”

The company, in fact, goes as far as to say the potential benefits of the Birney Hill scheme “by far outweigh green concerns”.

“Apart from the fact that few other opportunities exist to provide housing for our children and grandchildren, Birney Hill would create 900 job opportunities over the next five to ten years and bring a superbly-designed ‘green’ housing scheme to the area,” the spokesman said.

“A new community trust will have access to circa £9m to work with the local community to deliver numerous immeasurable benefits.

“It will lead the way in the UK for cost-saving, energy-efficient housing set in a beautiful, biodiverse landscape.

“The development would create new wildlife corridors as habitats for protected species and protect key views and landscapes, as well as enhancing landscape quality.”

The Banks Group takes a similar view of its development; having examined all options available, it has chosen the most appropriate location and is taking a “benefits-driven approach” to its Clickemin scheme.

Environment and community director Mark Dowdall said: “As a North-East-based, family-owned business, we fully understand the character of the area and appreciate the matters that need to be addressed as part of our Ponteland proposals, but we also firmly believe that everyone has a right to the opportunity to live in the place that they wish to be and that our plans would provide just such an opportunity in this sought-after area.”

Although the green belt may have hit the local headlines in recent months more than ever before, the concept itself dates back to the 1940s, when it was introduced to control urban sprawl.

Essentially, the designation refers to a ring of countryside where urbanisation will be resisted for the foreseeable future, maintaining an area where agriculture, forestry and outdoor leisure are prioritised.

According to a Government planning policy guidance note, there should be a general presumption against building there unless in exceptional circumstances where the benefits of green belt development outweigh the harm.

The National Planning Policy Framework would seem to reinforce this protection, making further references to using previously-developed land effectively and ensuring large-scale developments take the character of the area into account.

However, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, among others, fears the Government has sent mixed signals.

The document, it argues, also contains several pro-development polices, making reference to the “significant weight” to be placed on economic growth, to which planning controls such as green belt are an impediment.

Councils are likewise coming under pressure from government planning inspectors because of housing land targets, the CPRE believes.

In Northumberland, the situation gets even trickier.

In 2009, when six district councils were merged into a unitary authority, they brought separate planning policies with them – in Hexham’s case, Tynedale Council’s, while Castle Morpeth Borough Council’s still applies to Ponteland.

Many, therefore, believe developers are now exploiting a window of opportunity as Northumberland County Council sets about formulating its overarching core strategy, setting out the vision for the county over the next 15 years.

As the second round of consultation on the proposals begins, Hexham MP Guy Opperman is calling for swift action when it comes to cementing green belt policy.

Whatever happens, however, the council has offered assurances it is listening.

A spokesman said: “There could be circumstances where, if needs could not be met over the plan period without incursions into the green belt, there may be a case for looking at boundary alterations.

“However, this could only be done in exceptional circumstances and would need to be strongly justified in terms of the land supply elsewhere.

“As with other proposals, the council will take people’s views into account.

“We will listen to suggestions made, whether these be to keep the green belt the same or alter its boundaries.”

Any changes, the spokesman added, would need to be approved by the Government.

Source: Hexham Courant

Ponteland in the Twentieth Century

Ponteland was a small typical Northumbrian village before the First World War. There were farms and farmers,blacksmiths, carriers, saddlers and other trades associated with the rural economy. Livestock of every kind abounded andtwo coaching inns were in their last days. The population lived where they worked. The turnpike road to Scotland was hard-surfaced and motor cars appeared. The city of Newcastle, only 8 miles away, was an industrial hub where the workers lived in rows of terraced houses and coal-based industries produced constant smoke and dirt. The Northern Allotment Society was founded to give people the chance to buy plots of land out of town and grow vegetables and flowers for the markets. It was a novel idea to own land and to grow crops on it and the man who made it work was Joseph Wakinshaw. A number of small schemes met with success and when two farms came up for auction in 1907, the Darras Hall Farm and the Little Callerton with Callerton Moor, a total of over a 1000 acres, there was enough support for the NAS to buy both lots for short of £60 000. Careful planning went into the infrastructure of the Darras Hall Estate and the Trust Deed laid down standards still maintained today. The Estate boundaries are fixed and houses have a minimum plot size. Many market gardens flourished and houses were built, very few at first. A railway came and went and it was only after the Second World War that new housing eventually took off and by the end of the century some houses were being demolished to make way for modern buildings and mansions. One of the first houses built still has a stable, but in a dilapidated condition! 

Some ribbon development, of the kind now frowned on, occurred along the North Road, the West Road and Cheviot View on the Newcastle Road, mainly between the wars. Social housing, originally called council housing, was built in the 1950s in fields behind the Blackbird.The Ladywell estate at the west end of the village was built in the early 1960s. Small infill estates have been built since 1980. The Eland Haugh estate behind the golf club was built on the flood plain. Would permission be granted today? Fairney Edge extended Mayfair Gardens up to the burn of that name, and most recently the old mart field became The Lairage. The next big project will be housing on the police HQ site out at Smallburn. The original buildings were erected in 1903 as Cottage Homes for workhouse children from Newcastle, when they closed, it was used as a teacher training college before finally ending up with the police. So, lots of varied housing in Ponteland. We have a population of over 11 000. But, and this is a big one, there has been norecent significant expansion of our village facilities. We can’t call ourselves a town in the way that both Morpeth and Hexham are towns. We have the population but not the infrastructure, the facilities or even the parking spaces.When there are proposals for hundreds, or thousands, more housesthese all become critical concerns for the present residents. Planners give permissions for care homes and restaurants in the centre and stick the medical block at the far end of the industrial estate! 

Ponteland is unique settlement, neither village nor town, and there is no comparable place anywhere in the country! It is an aspirational, desirable place to live and most residents work in Newcastle, easily reached with good transport links. And greedy developers would love a slice of it. But without the Green Belt it could end up as just another outer suburb of Newcastle and the residents choose to live in Ponteland and Darras Hall because of its village feel and the accessibility of the surrounding countryside.

We don’t want any development in the Green Belt!
It has been in place for nearly 60 years and it is even more important today.

Source: Ponteland Green Belt Web Site

Row breaks out over Ponteland and Hexham green belt land

A POLITICAL row has broken out over the future of green belt land surrounding two of Northumberland's most desirable towns.

Conservative MP Guy Opperman sparked the war of words by warning that the county council will be accused of “selling off the family silver” if it goes ahead with plans to remove certain areas of the green belt around Ponteland and Hexham.

Hexham MP Mr Opperman – together with local Tory councillors – has been waging a campaign against proposals to build hundreds of homes in countryside next to the two towns.

He said this week that no one wants to see large swathes of green belt land being sold off to developers for “cash crop” housing estates, and insisted the council has a duty to protect what makes the area so special.

Now he has been accused by Liberal Democrat bosses at County Hall of trying to panic people for political purposes.

Mr Opperman is strongly opposing plans by two separate developers to build 800 houses in the green belt surrounding Ponteland and Darras Hall.

He has also spoken out against potential housing development at the Shaws Farm site at Hexham.

This week he warned the Lib Dem administration at County Hall that it will be open to accusations of selling off the family silver if it removes land from the green belt.

He said: “People are annoyed that, at the same time as possibly selling off our green belt, we see them [the county council] splashing out millions on vanity projects like a new £20m leisure centre for Ashington.”

Mr Opperman says Local Government Minister Eric Pickles pledged recently that the green belt would continue to be protected from development, so the only scope for making changes rests with the local authority. The council is examining existing green belt allocations as part of the development of its new Core Strategy.

Lib Dem leaders say they are “astonished” by Mr Opperman’s comments and any suggestion that they are to launch an attack on the green belt.

Executive member for regeneration, Tom Brechany, said: “It is inaccurate, not to mention completely unhelpful, of Guy Opperman to try to panic people in this way for political purposes. I have had assurances from council officers on this issue, who have confirmed there are no definite proposals to delete areas of the green belt in Northumberland. Indeed, the Core Strategy, at the issues and options stage, actually proposes an extension of the existing green belt around Morpeth.”

Hexham Lib Dem county councillor Derek Kennedy said: “I am committed to protecting the green belt and have held a number of meetings with residents and officers on the issue, with more to come.”

A council spokeswoman said it is awaiting further Government guidance on the green belt issue, and policies in the emerging Core Strategy will take account of this. “The council has no current proposals to delete areas of the green belt in Northumberland. Notwithstanding this, we have a duty to consider whether any green belt deletions may be necessary to meet future housing and employment land requirements as part of the statutory plan-making process.”

Source: Journal Live

Demonstrators see Red over Green Belt Plans

Saying no: Chairman of Ponteland's Green Belt Group Alma Dunigan

led the demonstration against Green Belt development.

THE fight against Green Belt development in Ponteland shows no sign of flagging, as impassioned residents turned out en masse to attend a demonstration over the plans.

The town, known for its peaceful and picturesque character, is facing the prospect of 500 homes being built either side of the A696 by Banks Property and a further 280 houses at the Birney Hill area.

Lugano Group, which is currently running consultations on the latter scheme, also owns considerable land on the Dissington Estate, leading some to believe this proposal could be the tip of the iceberg.

On Tuesday, as Ponteland Town Council’s planning committee prepared to discuss the group’s scoping report, over 150 residents gathered outside to make their opposition felt.

“This is to let Northumberland County Council, Ponteland Town Council and any developers who are thinking of coming to Ponteland know that we care passionately about retaining our Green Belt,” said Alma Dunigan, chairman of the Green Belt Group.

“It’s reassuring that everyone here shares the same point of view; Ponteland residents will never let you down.”

Among those gathered were Douglas and Marjorie Collender, who spoke of their worries about flooding and the strain on infrastructure, accusing the developers of putting profit before the needs of the community.

Another resident, Amanda Williamson, condemned the proposed developments as “money spinners”.

The protest comes as Lugano prepares to hold its fourth consultation event on the Birney Hill scheme – and the first detailing what the developer describes as the residents’ preferred layout.

Tomorrow, a master plan will go on display at Ponteland Memorial Hall, illustrating what Lugano calls “generous green landscaping”, with woodland and grassland surrounding the houses and new play areas incorporated into the scheme.

The developer would provide 60 affordable homes, as well as self-build plots and an office “hub”, while addressing concerns raised by residents and incorporating sustainable design principles.

On Tuesday, however, councillors highlighted potential problems with traffic volume, and questioned Lugano’s assertion that public transport was already adequate in the area.

“There are 280 houses, which would translate to a minimum of 600 car journeys a day,” said mayor Coun. Peter Cowey.

“That would have quite an impact and we don’t have the infrastructure for that.”

Noise and light pollution would also have to be considered carefully, as would surface water drainage and flood risk, given past incidents in the town.

“This is a critical situation,” said planning committee chairman Coun. David Butler.

Councillors also pointed out that there were currently 340 houses for sale in Pontleland, and 75 to rent, calling into question the need for a vast swathe of new properties.

And they noted that Northumberland County Council must seek professional, independent and properly considered judgements when considering such issues.

“My attitude would be: ‘It’s the Ponteland Green Belt; get off,” Coun. Cowey said.

Points raised during the discussion, including recommendations for additional issues Lugano should consider, will be sent to Northumberland County Council soon.

Tomorrow’s consultation event, at which experts will be on hand to answer questions, will run from 11am to 4pm.

Source: Hexham Courant

Property firm aims to keep costs down at Darras Hall new housing estate

A PROPERTY company looking to build hundreds of homes on land close to an upmarket North East community has announced plans to make some of them ‘affordable’.

The Lugano Group, which is behind plans for 250 to 300 homes on land close to the exclusive Darras Hall estate, has said it plans to create a community land trust in order to keep costs down for buyers.

However, a group of local residents which is opposing the development has claimed the company is simply seeking to win support for its project and that there will be hidden costs for buyers.

Lugano wants to build the homes at Birney Hill. It is one of two companies at the centre of controversy over moves to build 800 new dwellings in the green belt surrounding the estate and Ponteland.

The company has now announced that it is seeking to create the trust which, it says, would remove the cost of land ownership from buying at the site, said to be around a third of the cost of a property purchase.

Under this arrangement, the homeowner owns the property but not the land on which it is situated.

This, Lugano says, would save residents around 50% of the market cost for such properties, allowing it to charge around £110,000 to £120,000 for a two-bedroom house and £130,000 to £140,000 for three bedrooms.

Director Scott Munro said: “Residents told us that many younger people and families cannot afford to buy or rent homes in Ponteland. We propose to offer local people first say on the affordable housing at Birney Hill by putting in place a community land trust which allows residents or people with family ties to Ponteland to benefit from high quality, low cost houses, but puts control back in the hands of the community.

“The land trust means that these homes would be managed by the community, and the trust will select who gets the right to buy a house if an owner sells it. The land discount will always be applied. It is a powerful way to enable generations of families to live close to each other who would not otherwise be able to afford to.”

The company has also said it envisages building around 30 low cost starter houses, 30 for “downsizing” families or retired people and 30 to 50 self-build plots, although it expects Northumberland County Council to determine the exact amount of affordable housing.

The company says the self-build plots would start at between £150,000 to £200,000.

Last night, Alma Dunigan, chairman of the Ponteland Green Belt Group which is fighting the scheme, claimed she was not surprised by Lugano’s statements on affordable homes, claiming the developer would “think this is going to win everybody over”. She claimed there would be “hidden costs” for buyers.

Lugano is holding a Birney Hill development exhibition on Saturday, October 27 from 11am to 4pm at Memorial Hall on Darras Road in Ponteland.

Source: Journal Live

Ponteland town planning chief blasts Medburn homes plans - Today's News - News

A TOWN planning chief says a proposed executive housing scheme being recommended for the green light "blatantly flies in the face of the rules".

The proposal for 14 executive homes at Medburn, near Ponteland, Northumberland, is facing major opposition ahead of Northumberland County Council’s decision-making meeting this week.

Three years ago an application to build three houses on the site next to The Nursery was turned down – and refused again on appeal.

Ponteland Town Council planning committee chair David Butler said: “It is staggering that this application is being recommended for acceptance.

“It is bizarre – it blows my mind. My colleagues on the committee all feel like me – this is a big development which is blatantly wrong.

“It breaks all the rules in the book, in that it is greenfield development in an area of Medburn where only brownfield development is permitted. And it is not sustainable, as there is no shop or church or pub or pedestrian links in Medburn. The (county) council’s own planning officers’ report admit this – yet it is being recommended for permission. I cannot believe it.”

The town council planning committee act only as consultees to the County Council, who make planning decisions.

A report to the county’s West Area Planning Committee, who meet on Wednesday, acknowledges: “Medburn in its own right is not considered to be a sustainable location for new housing development.”

However, new national planning policies introduced in March “to an extent” have shifted the position so that new development could be considered to support services in adjacent Ponteland.

Medburn was originally built as a set of single-storey smallholdings in the recovery period after World War One. But there has been a series of executive developments in recent years. Applicants’ agents GVA of Newcastle say the development would supply a niche form of executive housing of which there is a shortage in the North East.

And they have agreed a £255,000 Section 106 contribution to finance affordable housing elsewhere in the Ponteland area, as any on the development site would “undermine the intended executive nature of the scheme”.

But Coun Butler said: “Where does that mean affordable housing would go? It certainly isn’t going to be on this site.

“What also staggers me is that the county council say there are not any other relevant planning applications or decisions – but a previous application was refused, and refused again on appeal, as recently as 2009.”

The planners’ report says: “On balance it is considered that, whilst the proposal would conflict with national, regional and local planning policy insofar as new residential development is proposed on a greenfield site in an unsustainable village, such conflicts with policy would be sufficiently outweighed by the contribution that the scheme would make to executive housing provision both locally and regionally ... and affordable housing opportunities in the surrounding area through the payment of a financial contribution in lieu of on-site units.

“The development would make significant and meaningful contributions towards addressing executive housing and affordable housing shortages in the area.”

Source: Journal Live

Community Joins Forces to Fight Development Plan

A COMMUNITY has formally come together to fight to protect Ponteland’s green belt.

More than 100 residents living in streets beside a proposed housing site have met to unite in a battle to protect the land from major new housing developments.

And a Ponteland Green Belt Group made its presence felt at the latest exhibition by Lugano Group, where it revealed plans for between 200 to 300 homes at Birney Hill.

The residents’ meeting was organised by householders on the eastern outskirts of Ponteland who are opposing all development on green belt land, including fields surrounding their homes where Banks Group is proposing to build up to 500 new properties.

One of the organisers, Susan Johnson, of Cheviot View, said: “We were delighted by the response from people in the area. Everyone is very concerned about the proposal for this and other areas around the village. Ponteland is the gateway to rural Northumberland and maintaining the green belt is vital.

“There is no proven need for more housing in Ponteland and developments on this scale would have a major impact on the area. Ponteland is already at saturation point. Traffic is a problem, parking in the village is difficult, the schools are already full and the village simply could not cope with developments of this nature.”

Mrs Johnson said that in a very short space of time the group had collected more than 200 responses to Northumberland County Council’s Local Development Plan Core Strategy document. These had been forwarded to the county with views on future planning.

Fellow resident Lesley Noble said residents have urged the authority not to class Ponteland as Tier One, which would make the area a ‘main focus for future development and regeneration’.

“Ponteland is not a key hub within the county for healthcare, housing, employment and retail which is what mainly defines a Tier One settlement,” she said.

“The vast majority of residents consider that Ponteland clearly meets the county’s criteria to be a Tier Two settlement with development that maintains and strengthens Ponteland as we know it.

“Being listed as a Tier One town could be seen as giving developers the green light to build what they want, where they want and without considering the wishes of the people in the area, the character of the village and its capacity to expand.”

Both Banks and Lugano claim that there are not enough brown field sites in the area to satisfy the county’s requirement for new homes.

Although the new National Planning Policy Framework allows building on the Green Belt in exceptional circumstances, the Ponteland Green Belt Group is concerned that the Government’s recent drive to boost the economy could see large housing estates being approved on the edge of the village and Darras Hall estate.

Its Protection Co-ordinator, John Blundell, said: “Communities are now faced with the loss of green belt through new legislation that is contrary to its original intention of allowing local residents to have their say on these issues because of Government demand for houses.

“This is not a small development of houses here and there, but large changes which cannot be undone.

“Communities must not look back in years to come to regret having done nothing about the loss of green areas and to have at least tried to stop the urbanisation that threatens their quality of life.

“There will always be brown field sites for building, but once a green field site is built upon, it is gone forever.”

The residents’ actions are being supported by their local MP Guy Opperman.

The number of people signing his petition, which calls for no building in the Ponteland Green Belt, is now close to 2,000.

Source: Morpeth Herald

Plans for 300 new Darras Hall homes on green belt land unveiled - Today's News - News

Plans for 300 new Darras Hall homes on green belt land unveiled - Today's News - News

Lugano Planning Ideas Day

PROPOSALS for the future of Ponteland will be put forward at the second event to be held by Lugano Group.

The company, which is examining the potential of about 2,500 acres of land which it owns on the nearby Dissington Estate and is also acting on behalf of some other landowners on the edge of the area, held a planning ideas day in the Memorial Hall on June 14.

After taking on board feedback from residents, it is now ready to showcase its initial plans for the area. Representatives will say how they believe issues raised on the day have been addressed.

As well as housing provision and design, other subjects that are being looked at include transport, community facilities, countryside and ecology, flooding and drainage, jobs and business and its vision for the centre of Ponteland.

Any proposals for new homes on Green Belt land will be met with strong opposition from hundreds of local residents who believe it should not be touched by development at all.

The latest exhibition will take place on Thursday, September 6, in the Memorial Hall between 2pm and 8pm and on Saturday, September 8, in the function suite at Ponteland Leisure Centre from 10am to 2pm.

Source: Morpeth Herald

Council goes back to the drawing board as long-term plans spark complaints - Local News - Morpeth Herald

PONTELAND Town Council will go back to the drawing board for its long-term future vision after receiving complaints from residents.

A three-stage bypass scheme, the extension of the Tyne and Wear Metro system to Ponteland and moving most or all of the schools to a campus off Rotary Way were among the ideas put forward in the authority’s 53-page Local Plan, which was put together over eight months.

But householders told councillors at a recent event in the Memorial Hall that they should have been involved in drawing up the document, rather than being consulted after it was finished in draft form.

As a result, members decided not to proceed with it and instead look into a neighbourhood community plan.

One of the residents who attended the Memorial Hall session, Muriel Sobo, said: “The credibility of the Local Plan was questioned because the authority had not engaged with the residents during the period of its gestation.

“In fact, there were people at the meeting who have specialised expertise which could have helped the town council in its deliberations, but the councillors’ attitude, oft repeated, is that they were elected to do a job and that is what they are doing. They need to listen more and begin to do what they were elected to do – reflect the views of the electorate.

“The proposed bypass, a subject in Ponteland for more than 50 years, was discussed with many reasons against, not least because it was routed through the flood defences on Eland Lane and across the flood plain and about 50 feet from one speaker’s house.”

Pilot neighbourhood planning areas, which include Morpeth, are being set up to see how new powers under the Localism Act can be used by communities. Residents, businesses and landowners are encouraged to have an input as to where development should go, along with the type and design that would be acceptable.

At a special meeting of the town council, members unanimously agreed to withdraw the Local Plan, although Coun David Butler said that some of its ideas could be useful in helping to draw up the new document.

Ponteland Mayor Peter Cowey said: “We accept that the best way forward is to involve the community in a neighbourhood plan.

“Now we need to investigate the whys and wherefores of this process before making any decisions on how to proceed.”

The authority also agreed its response to the various questions asked in Northumberland County Council’s Issues and Options section of the core strategy.

Among its comments was that the protection of the green belt is essential, but the majority of members said that they were unable to choose one of the settlement criteria laid down by the county council as they believe Ponteland is between tiers one and two.

Tier one locations are described as ‘Key hubs for education, healthcare, housing, employment and retail. Extensive range of services and facilities and good transport links’.

The tier two places are ‘Key service centres to their resident communities and in some cases a wider network of villages and hamlets. They also provide a wide range of services and facilities’.

Coun Robin Ramsay said: “Being in tier two reduces the pressure on us for developments, but we would miss out on the extra support that the county council will give to tier one locations.”

Source: Morpeth Herald

Residents get a first glimpse of garden village plans - Businesses News - Morpeth Herald

Residents get a first glimpse of garden village plans - Businesses News - Morpeth Herald