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

Residents have their say on Planning

PONTELAND residents can have their say about the area’s development at a planning ideas day.

The event in the Memorial Hall on Thursday has been organised by the Lugano Group on behalf of investors.

It will include workshops, a presentation and the chance to explore design ideas and suggestions for change in housing, shops, businesses, leisure and green areas.
Planners, engineers and ecologists will be on hand from 10am to discuss people’s concerns and future hopes for Ponteland. It will run all day, with the presentation of findings starting at 7pm.

Mayor Peter Cowey said: “It’s important that as many residents as possible go along to put forward their views.

“The night before this event we hope to pass our draft local plan, which fits in with Northumberland County Council’s Local Development Framework process. This would allow councillors to discuss openly with the Lugano Group about our long-term aspirations for the town. We will also be holding our own meeting at the Memorial Hall about the document, which will form part of our consultation with the public. People’s comments will help us to come up with the final plan.”


Source: Morpeth Herald

Residents in fresh battle against Bistro

RESIDENTS and community representatives are preparing for another battle against plans for a new bar and bistro in Ponteland.

An appeal hearing in front of a planning inspector will take place next Wednesday as the developers behind the proposed facility in Bell Villas attempt to get it approved at the fourth time of asking.

The application from Newco (Ponteland) director Jonathan Stokes for a two-storey bar and restaurant, which was formerly a Co-op store and Wine Rack off-licence, was refused by Northumberland County Council’s West Area Planning Committee in January.

Councillors voted six to one against the officer recommendation to approve the re-submitted application, saying more can be done to advertise the premises as a retail outlet.

The same committee turned it down in February 2011 on the grounds that it would be an unacceptable loss of retail space and in July, planning inspector Ian Jenkins agreed with its assessment.

But Newco decided to press ahead with a second appeal as it says the property has been on the market for a number of months and there has been no significant interest in the site from retail businesses or entrepreneurs.

People living close to the building in Ryehaugh have a range of other concerns, including noise disturbance, odours and problems that would result from a lack of parking facilities.

One resident, Jennifer Hardy, said: “We have support from Ponteland parish and county councillors and a planning consultant, and we will put our case forward strongly.

“The plans have been flawed right from the start, but the county council officers have refused to accept the parking and traffic implications if the application is approved.

“They have the misguided view that people will park at the north end of Ponteland and walk down to the premises, even in the rain and snow.

“We’re already getting people parking in our street and at the Methodist Church to go to the Diamond Inn or The New Rendezvous restaurant next door, so it will be even worse if the bar and bistro was to open.

“It’s no good having an empty building, but another eating and drinking establishment with no parking which is very close to homes is not what we need.”

The appeal hearing will be heard in the Council Chamber, Prospect House, Hexham, starting at 10am.

Source: Morpeth Herald

Ponteland Villagers to Battle Bistro Bid - Again

VILLAGERS opposing plans for a bar and bistro next to their homes will go into battle tonight - for the third time.

Families at Ryehaugh, Ponteland, are outraged that developers have refused to accept defeat despite a planning rejection and a dismissed appeal in the last year.

They say the re-submission barely varies from the original application.

But after a new retail survey, Northumberland County Council planners are now being recommended to approve the new plan at Bell Villas, in the busy heart of Ponteland.

A decision will be made by the county's west area planning committee when it meets in Hexham this evening.

The original planning application for the premises – which have stood empty for two years – was thrown out partly because it would take away the desired proportion of retail space in Ponteland.

The appeal inspector said the bistro development would cause unacceptable harm to the viability of Ponteland village centre.

But now minor changes to the physical character of the building in the re-submission from applicant Jonathon Stokes, combined with a full retail survey demonstrating the lack of interest in the unit, have shifted the balance, according to planning officers.

"The re-submission comprehensively overcomes the earlier reasons for refusal by the area planning committee west and the reasons for dismissal by the planning inspectorate," a report to tonight's committee says.

"The re-submission also overcomes the earlier concerns that the proposal could harm the character and vibrancy of the commercial and business centre of the village."

Charlie Cross, whose home backs on to the outer wall of the former wine store and Co-op, said: "There appear to be little, if any, material change to this latest submission.

"It seems to be almost identical to the previous submission which was initially rejected by Northumberland County Council."

Villagers claim the parking and traffic problems in and around Bell Villas would be strongly aggravated.

And noise and smell from the premises would be an added problem for residents already suffering the effects of existing outlets at Bell Villas.

It is claimed that 17 food and drink outlets are now operating in Ponteland, to the detriment of retail business – a central plank of the appeal refusal last July.

Jennifer Hardy, also of Ryehaugh, said: "There is puzzlement throughout the village that this re-submission has been made. It was only in July that the planning inspector dismissed the appeal made by the applicants.

"The inspector said that not sufficient advertising had taken place in the Press to try to secure a retail business.

"Two adverts in The Journal, one in July and another around the time this application was re-submitted in September, is certainly not adequate."

"And the situation is not the same as it was a year ago, as traffic and parking problems are worse."

Ponteland Town Council has lodged a six-point objection including highway safety, planning discrepancies and neighbourhood amenity.

Hexham MP Guy Opperman backed the original objections made by local councillors Richard Dodd and Eileen Armstrong.

And Ponteland Civic Society also lodged written objections.

Source: Journal Live