Mount Oswald plan 'cannot be called in'

An artist's impression of the Mt Oswald development An artist's impression of the Mt Oswald development

CAMPAIGNERS fighting to save a city golf course from a £200m housing development have suffered another blow, after officials said the scheme could not be “called in”.

Durham County Council granted Banks Property planning permission to build nearly 300 homes, accommodation for 1,000 students, offices and community facilities on the 95-acre Mount Oswald golf course, off South Road, Durham, last month – despite claims the development would cost green space and cause traffic chaos.

Afterwards, the City of Durham Trust asked the Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles, to “call in” the scheme for further investigation, on the grounds it goes against the Local Plan.

However, Mr Pickles’ officials have replied saying he has no powers to review a planning application once permission is granted.

Their letter says councils must refer certain applications to the Secretary of State to see whether he wishes to call them in but Durham council concluded the Mount Oswald scheme did not fall into this category.

Douglas Pocock, the trust’s honorary secretary, said: “The trust’s view is that it is monstrous that an authority can itself decide which departure is worthy of forwarding to the minister, not least in this case, given the widespread opposition and its well-argued case.

“In a wider context, this is but the most important instance of the consequence of the city having no voice, its citizens being disenfranchised: the county town, yet without even parish status.”

Durham City MP Roberta Blackman-Woods, a strong opponent of the Mount Oswald scheme, said: “Whilst this is obviously not good news, I will still be writing to the Secretary of State along with a range of stakeholders from across Durham, to make clear that the application has so far only been granted outline planning permission and as the application contravenes the current Local Plan could be called in by him.”

The MP also wants a neighbourhood planning forum established to give Durham City residents a stronger voice and has called on the council to have more local councillors voting on such schemes.

Banks says the development will offer outstanding, high-quality housing within a green infrastructure, helping to make Durham City an economic driving force for the county.

Comments(8)

argo2013 says...
4:52pm Mon 4 Mar 13

council 1 busiebodies 0

Longbowman666 says...
8:49pm Mon 4 Mar 13

Even if the 'busybodies' may have a point...? People are concerned, and those concerns deserve to be taken seriously.

Mind you, as usual its nice to see what passes for democracy with DCC.

NJGR26 says...
9:50pm Mon 4 Mar 13

argo2013 wrote:
council 1 busiebodies 0
I have no doubt that argo123 works for Banks- I would like point out you got the score wrong

Council & Banks Albion 8 - busybodies 0

That is all from me

argo2013 says...
9:30am Tue 5 Mar 13

No i don't work for banks, but i actually took time to study the plans and noted they are not going to plaster the site in concrete and it looks a good developement,please excuse my flipancy before, but i get frustrated by people continually trying to stop Durham develop for the future.

Birdyy says...
12:06pm Tue 5 Mar 13

The scheme is increasing access to the site, leaving much of it green and providing much needed student accommodation.

I just hope the detailed design for the building is tasteful and of an appropriate scale for the setting.

I encourage The City of Durham Trust to be part of the solution and to gain influence. Saying no does not equal influence.

NJGR26 says...
1:35pm Tue 5 Mar 13

argo2013 wrote:
No i don't work for banks, but i actually took time to study the plans and noted they are not going to plaster the site in concrete and it looks a good developement,please excuse my flipancy before, but i get frustrated by people continually trying to stop Durham develop for the future.
Don't get me wrong - nobody wants Durham to develop more than me. I am Durham born and bred and will never leave.

I agree Durham needs investment and development but it has to be done in the right areas. There are multiple brown field sites across county durham which could have had (and would of welcomed) this investment. However, digging up a green field resource such as a golf club is not the way forward.

Forget the propaganda - Banks are only interested in the design and build 'gated' community - the university will get their bit as reward and the rest of the land will split down and sold on to other developers as another nice earner for the Banks Group. In 5 yrs time when all of the said concrete has been poured - this site will look nothing like the plans in which you have studied. That my friend is a fact !

The theory this development will attract entrepreneurs to bring their business's and money to Durham is absolutely embrassing

argo2013 says...
2:19pm Tue 5 Mar 13

njgr26, Yes but are these brownfield sites in places people want to build,if banks or anyone who may buy up part of the site surely will have to re-submit plans if they want to make changes to the original concept?

NJGR26 says...
9:27am Wed 6 Mar 13

argo2013 wrote:
njgr26, Yes but are these brownfield sites in places people want to build,if banks or anyone who may buy up part of the site surely will have to re-submit plans if they want to make changes to the original concept?
So is developing only on green field sites sustainable ??? Because from where I am standing green belt land in and around Durham City is now getting few and far between.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree