A FORMER council chairman has criticised planning officers and a chief executive in a dispute over plans to turn a business area over to housing.

The proposal to convert Commercial Yard, in Barnard Castle, into homes has met with strong opposition in the town.

The yard is home to a variety of small businesses which will be forced to move to other locations if the housing plan goes ahead.

A petition signed by more than 1,500 people in Barnard Castle has been presented to the council, and dozens of objectors gathered at the council offices, off Galgate, last week to air their grievances.

The dispute has been fuelled by former Teesdale District Council chairman Councillor Newton Wood, who has made a scathing attack on the planning officers and chief executive Charles Anderson's handling of the application.

Coun Wood says that the planning officers' report to members of the development control committee was misleading and that the application went against the local plan.

The former chairman, who stepped down earlier this year, is further angered by a last-minute decision by the council to overrule his attempt to have planning permission rescinded.

Teesdale council chairman Phil Hughes told a meeting of the authority last week that the decision had been taken following legal advice.

Coun Wood said: "The way this whole episode has been handled is appalling. I think officers and the chief executive have to be held accountable.

"All I'm bothered about is that people are given a fair hearing on applications, and I don't think that has been the case here."

Mr Anderson said: "The council considered the planning application carefully, listened to the advice of planning officers and could not find any reason to refuse the application.

"The three-day grace period, in which members can intercede, was not taken."

The council's head of planning, Ken Hughes, defended the planning report on the proposal.

He said: "I'm content that the application was handled correctly, and members made the final decision.

"We can only advise, and we recommended to grant planning permission.

"There have to be planning grounds to refuse, otherwise there will be a costly appeal and inquiry process."