Hesleden planning appeal update (DRAFT)

I published an article on these pages recently giving an update on developments with the Hesleden pit heap planning appeal process, and highlighting a few issues arising from a meeting Stacey and I held with planning officers a couple of weeks ago. 

As I mentioned in the article we arranged a follow up meeting to include representatives from the Hesledens Residents' Association and from the parish council with the intention of clarifying a few outstanding issues and raising any additional concerns on behalf of the community. That meeting took place in county hall earlier today and I’ve highlighted below the main points raised with the head of planning and an officer from the council's legal department. 

Given some remaining confusion in the community about the role the council, as the local planning authority, would play throughout the appeal process I asked the officers present to clarify the position they have adopted since the planning application seeking permission to continue extraction works on site was refused by the planning committee last September. In response the head of planning confirmed that the council was fully behind the decision made by the planning committee to do whatever it was able to bring extraction works on site to an end. This position is fully aligned with the wishes of planning committee members, the residents of Hesleden and both Stacey and I as the two local county councillors.

An update was then given on the current status of the planning appeal process and the council's enforcement notice issued to the company last year. Following legal negotiations the council has withdrawn the original notice and the company has agreed to produce a workable site restoration scheme which will be used to restore the site to an acceptable condition when works come to an end. Once the enforcement notice is issued however the company would still hold the right to appeal to the national Planning Inspectorate (PINS) against the notice within a 28-day period. Although this isn't want we want to see happen it is a legal right for the company, and is something beyond the control of the council.

We also asked officers for clarification on the routes that wagons are meant to use when coming into and going out of the village. The council has agreed to check on this point and take the necessary action if the company doesn’t comply with the agreed routes.

In addition we raised concerns about the impact on the community of ongoing extraction works, and we referred specifically to unacceptable dust and limestone emissions which continue to have a damaging effect on public health - something that planning committee members referred to last September when they refused consent for works to continue. We were told in response that the council carries out regular site inspections to gauge the level of noise and dust emissions and that this information is logged and acted upon if certain safety levels appear to be breached. In response to our request to install dust monitors closer to the site the council agreed to contact the relevant officers to see if this could be done. 

Clearly it's important that if the council is to provide robust evidence to the inspector about the effect of extraction works on public health it needs to ensure much more accurate detection rates closer to the site, especially in Gray Avenue where residents have reported that fish have been poisoned by limestone emissions. In building up that evidence base the council’s offer to follow up on our request for additional monitoring equipment was welcomed by us as local members and the residents in attendance.

Finally the council has assured us that there will be no time wasted in pursuing an acceptable outcome on behalf of the community. Given that this development has dragged on far longer than anyone expected, and with a much graver impact on the community than expected, we think it's vital that the council is ready to submit the enforcement notice as soon as the company's revised restoration plan is received and accepted by the council. We have been given an assurance today that the council fully understands the concerns of the community and that they will take timely action without unnecessary delay.

We will continue to monitor developments with the council's forthcoming enforcement notice and also progress as it progresses through the planning appeal process if the company opts to appeal against the notice.    

Coalition urged to come clean about its Crimdon parking charge fiasco

Last week I published an article on these pages promoting a consultation on the council's plans to introduce parking charges at Crimdon. A map was included in the post indicating where the council intended to introduce parking charges, and critically, where they were proposing to leave parking free to visitors.

The map circulated by the council last week clearly shows just a small section of parking bays recommended for charges, and the key attached confirms this as the only location where parking charges are proposed. Nowhere in the plan is there any indication of proposed parking charges elsewhere. 

However, I've found out today that the plan was incorrect and had been circulated in error.

By way of an update on latest developments I’ve had a conversation this afternoon with an officer who only now has told me that at this stage the proposals circulated are for consultation with transport and emergency service teams only, with the intention of holding a public consultation exercise afterwards. In that regard the proposals remain just that for the time being.

In addition, the council has admitted to me that the plan circulated last week was inaccurate and misleading in that it does not show where they were proposing to introduce parking charges. As you can see from the key in the attached image the plan indicates that the council was proposing parking charges at a small section at the northern edge only, and nowhere else.

Personally I find it astonishing that the council has circulated incorrect information on its proposals, and I know that our residents feel duped and let down after being led to believe that the Tory/Lib Dem coalition had dropped its damaging plans to introduce parking charges at Crimdon, something that as local members Stacey and I have campaigned against from the start.

There have been a lot of misleading and confusing communications recently, including proposed highway repairs at Castle Eden and the pit heap appeal process at Hesleden, so I think it’s vital that the coalition comes clean with the public about what they really propose to do at Crimdon. With that in mind I have asked for the correct plan to be circulated prior to any public 'consultation' exercise. 

As things stand I have real misgivings about the way that DCC, under coalition control, communicates with local members so I've urged them to be absolutely clear in any further communications on this matter. Only when members of the public are made fully aware of the council's real intentions can they properly raise their concerns or make their comments.

PLEASE NOTE: it is vital that as many people as possible respond to the consultation as soon as it’s announced. In the meantime there are contact details for the council shown in the article published on these pages on Friday 26 April.

Monthly roundup of local issues for April 2024

Once again last month was another busy one in and around the villages of the Blackhall area. 

Repairs to the public footpath on the B1281 between Blackhall Colliery and Hesleden, a planning appeal update at Hesleden Pit Heap, reporting flood and drainage issues across our patch after exceptionally heavy rainfall and a council consultation on parking charges at Crimdon.

These are just a few of the local issues I've been dealing with over the past few weeks. Please follow the individual links below for full details and current updates:

Resolving drainage issues at Crimdon: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/03/latest-update-on-land-drainage-issue-at.html

B1281 footpath repairs completed: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/footpath-repairs-on-b1281-between.html

Heavy rainfall and flooding: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/prolonged-heavy-rainfall-causes-several.html

Report from the Blackhall PACT meeting: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/update-from-blackhall-pact-meeting-for.html

Hesleden planning appeal update: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/hesleden-pit-heap-planning-enforcement.html

Priority signage on High Hesleden chicanes: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/priority-signs-on-high-hesleden-chicanes.html

Hesleden Pit Heap appeal - latest update: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/latest-developments-on-hesleden-pit.html

Company to address flooding incidents on B1281: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/company-preparing-to-address-water.html

Mayoral candidate Kim supports our Hesleden Pit Heap campaign: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/kim-mcguinness-pledges-support-for-our.html

Coalition urged to come clean on Crimdon parking charges: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/05/council-to-open-formal-public.html?m=1

Fence and barrier repair delays: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/update-on-delayed-fence-and-barrier.html

Update on delayed fence and barrier repairs

I’ve contacted the council again this week to express my concern about persistent delays to my requests to have fences and barriers replaced at two separate locations in Blackhall Colliery. 

Three years ago I reported a barrier on Middle Street for replacement after it was damaged beyond repair in a traffic collision. More recently, In November last year, I reported a fence at the bottom of First Street for replacement after it had been torn down and thrown onto a bonfire on the evening of 5 November. 

Since then I have requested updates on several occasions, only to be told that materials for the replacement works had been unavoidably delayed in the supply line. While acknowledging that there is likely to be some delay in sourcing materials I find it unacceptable that two fairly straightforward replacement schemes, in prominent places in the village, have been left in a state of disrepair for over three years in the case of the damaged barrier on Middle Street.

I’ve now received confirmation that works are scheduled to take place in the coming weeks as soon as the materials are received. Given repeated delays to works in the past I’ll monitor progress and urge the council where necessary to speed up the process and carry out repairs or replacement works at these two prominent and unsightly locations.   

Parking to remain free along Crimdon seafront

Last month I published an article on these pages about a meeting I’d held with a cabinet member in county hall a few weeks before to express my concerns about the council’s proposals to introduce parking charges along the sea front at Crimdon. Please see post dated Wednesday 27 March 2024 for full background details.

As you’ll see from that article I suggested at the meeting that the council should reconsider its plans to charge visitors to park at Crimdon, partly because it would drive visitors away from the area but also because it was unfair to force people who come to the beach and dene for exercise to pay to park.

In response the council agreed to suspend charges for the time being to allow consideration of a fairer scheme that would align with a traffic regulation order designed to prevent dangerous and inconsiderate parking along the front. Regular readers of these pages will be aware of reports from last summer of vehicles parking outside a private dwelling just off the front, and also in areas that risked obstructing access for emergency response vehicles.

I’ve received a revised proposal tonight from the council which in effect indicates free parking in bays along the front at Crimdon, with just a handful of bays to the north of the site subject to parking charges. The council believes that these revisions will ‘manage occupancy’ and free up spaces to enable parking at peak times where necessary (see image below).

I’ve reproduced above a map of the northern section of the front at Crimdon setting out the new proposals for parking. The area hatched in blue at the top left of the image shows a small overspill section where vehicles will be charged to park, leaving the rest of the bays along the front free.

The image below shows the southern side of the site where parking outside the parking bays will be prohibited. Specifically this applies to parking outside the private dwelling nearby too. In both images the yellow lines shown in the map are designated no parking zones designed to prevent parking along the open grassed verges and prevent any further incidents of careless parking along the front which in the past has obstructed access to emergency vehicles.

If you have any comments on these proposals please contact trafficconsultations@durham.gov.uk before 17 May 2024.

Mayoral candidate Kim pledges support for our Hesleden Pit Heap campaign

It was great to meet up earlier this week with Alison Paterson from Blackhall Community Centre and Kim McGuinness, Labour's candidate for the North East Mayoral Combined Authority (NE-MCA) elections next Thursday, 2 May.

Kim came to Blackhall at Alison's invitation to talk about how Kim, if elected mayor, would make sure that villages like ours in Blackhall Colliery, and others across East Durham, are not left lagging behind the rest of the region.

Kim gave assurances that she feels that the people and communities of East Durham are an integral part of the North East and its villages can play a key part in the regional economy by supporting jobs and developing local facilities like our community centres and other essential local organisations.

After the meeting I talked with Kim about a few local issues, including delays in the ongoing planning appeal process which has enabled the developing company to continue extraction works on the former pit heap site in Hesleden despite the council's planning committee refusing permission for works to continue. 

I told Kim that residents were at the end of their tethers after years of dirt, noise and dust coming from the site, something that shouldn’t be allowed to continue given the concerns we’ve raised about the unacceptable impact of the development on the community. 

This travesty is underscored by the fact the county council’s planning committee refused permission last year for the company to continue working on site. Unfortunately the planning appeal system has enabled the company to continue extraction works regardless and this is having a detrimental impact on the community, just as I warned it would when I spoke at the planning committee meeting last September.

In response Kim told me that she backs our campaign against ongoing site works ‘every step of the way’. She fully understands the impact that continued works on site are having on our community and she has agreed to meet again with me to see how she can use her position as mayor to put pressure on the authorities to resolve this issue in favour of the community in Hesleden.

Company plans to tackle excess water overflow onto the B1281

Following several prolonged periods of heavy rainfall recently I received a query about excess water overflow onto the B1281 and the Gleeson housing estate currently under development nearby, something which has been a concern for some time.

I raised the matter again with the council's highways team asking for an update on the company's plans to address this issue and also their plans to respond to local concerns about reported safety issues on the roundabout at the entrance to the estate. Background details can be found in the link here: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/prolonged-heavy-rainfall-causes-several.html

Having received confirmation that the developer is responsible for dealing with those issues I've now been given an update from the company's engineer setting out their plans. I've published below their response below in full: 

In regard to the offsite S278/RSA comments, we are looking to appoint a contractor for the works in the next week or so. We have had a bit of trouble sorting one out as who we had originally lined up, walked away from it. At the moment, I don’t have an anticipated start date for the civils work but I think the street lighting works should be starting imminently.

Regarding the gully, which is high on site, I will ask for this to be dropped when we have a contractor on site to avoid ponding at the show homes.

We spoke about completing some trial holes to bottom out the issue with the water run off from the farmers field, this will also be picked up when we have a contractor start date.

Unfortunately, I don’t want to commit us to any time scales at present because we don’t have a lead time from the contractor we are looking to appoint as yet.

I've asked the highways office to monitor progress with these schemes and I'll update on any significant developments if and when they arise. In the meantime if you have any additional concerns about these issues please get in touch with me at: rob.crute@durham.gov.uk

Latest developments on the Hesleden pit heap enforcement process

Earlier this week I published an article expressing our concerns, and those of the community we represent, about the planning appeal process currently underway regarding ongoing extraction works at the former pit heap site in Hesleden.

I wrote in that piece about my serious misgivings about the way communications between the council and ourselves as local elected members have been handled during the planning process. The people who elect us as their representatives have every right to be kept informed of what is going on in their communities; that has always been our priority but it's become increasingly difficult to fulfil that aim when we are excluded from timely and critical information that affects our communities. Please see full details here: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2024/04/hesleden-pit-heap-planning-enforcement.html

In my earlier article I mentioned that we had arranged a meeting between officers from the planning office at county hall and ourselves as community representatives. We met yesterday and we think it's important that the details of that meeting are reported for public information.

Our first point was to express our serious concerns about the way information in the public interest is communicated to ourselves as the local elected members. It would appear from developments last week that decisions are being made without us being informed in a timely manner. That puts us on the back foot when we relay information to our communities - and we've told them in no uncertain terms that it's not acceptable. Consequently we've received an assurance from planning officers that communications on this issue in particular will be strengthened to ensure that any significant developments are reported back to us and our communities in a timely manner.

In addition we've made it clear that throughout the planning appeal process we fully expect the council to reinforce the decision of the council's elected planning committee to refuse the company's planning application to continue work on the former pit heap site in Hesleden. Planning committee members agreed with the concerns we put to them at the committee meeting last September that ongoing extraction works on the pit heap site were having a harmful impact on public health and the general amenity of the community in Hesleden. Consequently the committee resolved that all extraction works on site must cease, and that restoration works to bring the site to an acceptable standard should begin without delay. A report from last September's planning committee meeting can be found here: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2023/09/hesleden-community-stands-together-as.html

When we put this question to planning officers at the meeting to they told us in response that they were entirely behind the decision made by the planning committee last September. In other words, the council has assured us that they are unequivocally supportive of our position as local members that the end game of this whole process is to get the company to cease operations on site as soon as possible and return it to a decent condition for the benefit of the community.

Unfortunately we have no choice other than to accept that the planning process includes the legal right of applicants to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate against decisions made by planning committees, but we're concerned that delays in the process (which unfortunately allow the appellant to continue working until the government's planning inspector comes to a decision) are enabling the company to continue extraction works at the expense of local residents and businesses, regardless of the council's decision to reject the company's planning application. We also have to acknowledge that planning appeals fall entirely within the remit of the government's planning inspector, and as such the pace of the process itself is beyond the control of the council. 

Whether we like it or not the appeals process, and everything that comes with it, is in the hands of the Planning Inspectorate and it'll stay that way until the appeals process is completed. In my opinion there is a serious fault in any system which enables the developer to continue working on site even though their planning application was refused by the council, and even though they know that continued extraction works present a real risk to public health and the general amenity of the community.

We asked officers for an update on the status of the planning appeal registered with the Planning Inspectorate. In response we were told that one of the planning enforcement notices has been withdrawn so that the company can produce a revised restoration plan which will be fully enforced as part of a replacement enforcement notice due to be issued against the company soon. 

In addition we have been told that there is a currently an appeal from the company awaiting validation from the planning inspector. Again, when we put the question to officers, we received an assurance that the council's sole intention is to oppose any appeal by the company in line with the planning committee's decision last year to refuse consent for works to continue.

From the outset, alongside our communities, we've had to put our faith in the planning process, and we fought hard for many years against the company's proposals to develop the site. From the very start, over 10 years ago, we've argued that this would the wrong development, in the wrong place and that it would have a damaging impact on the community. We've been proved correct on that score, so we should accept nothing less than an outcome that brings an end to this chaos once and for all.

Finally, officers from the planning team have agreed to meet with me and Stacey, along with additional local representation from the parish council and the Hesledens Residents' Association, to clarify the current position of the enforcement process, reaffirm the council's total commitment to bring this development to an end in line with the planning committee's ruling and discuss in further detail any matters arising out of this latest development. We've written to the planning office to agree a time and date to meet in county hall as soon as possible. 

In the meantime if there are any issues that you would like us to know about please get in touch at: rob.crute@durham.gov.uk or stacey.deinali@durham.gov.uk 

Priority signs on the High Hesleden chicanes

I’ve contacted the county council’s highways section again to suggest that the risk of an accident could be significantly reduced if priority signs were installed at the three chicanes in High Hesleden. Regular readers of these pages will know that I’ve been pressing the council for some time to install the correct signage in the hope of preventing an accident before it occurs. Background details can be found in an article I published on this site in 2019: https://robcrute-blackhall.blogspot.com/2019/12/chicanes-at-high-hesleden.html?m=1

I’ve pointed out to the highways department that most other similar chicanes and pinch-points in the area have sign posts attached to them to signify which vehicle has right of way. For example the chicane on Front Street in Hesleden has illuminated road signs signifying who has priority over oncoming vehicle, and the same is true of the pinch-point on East Street in Blackhall Colliery.

There are clear ‘Give Way’ markings painted onto the road at the approach to the chicanes in High Hesleden to tell which vehicle has priority, but I’ve argued that in the interests of road safety there should be a consistent approach to street signs and traffic management across the county. For that reason alone it would make sense to bring the chicanes in High Hesleden into line with others nearby.

I’ll update on progress with this matter as soon as I have more information from the service, but in the meantime please let me know if there’s anything in your neighbourhood you would like me to deal with: rob.crute@durham.gov.uk

Hesleden Pit Heap - planning enforcement update

Late last week we were informed by a third party that there had been developments in the planning appeal process involving works on the site of the former pit heap in Hesleden. Essentially, we were told that the planning team had withdrawn one of the current enforcement notices against the company with the intention of issuing another enforcement notice - which on the face of it appears to be a tactical move towards reaching a 'satisfactory end result'. 

The first point to make is that we are less than happy that as local members we were not informed of this development and we were left to pick the information up second hand. Our approach in everything we do is always to keep our residents up to date with what's going on in their patch. Clearly this is impossible if we are not told in advance of critical issues which directly affect our communities. This isn't the first time we've been left in the dark on this particular matter. The council must manage its communications better if it wants to be seen as a credible source of public information.

In addition we have concerns about what this latest development will mean for the ongoing planning appeal process and the outcome that we've pressed for since day one - to bring about an end to works onsite to prevent any further misery and upheaval for our residents.

However it's early days and we need to know more about how this latest development plays out. With that in mind we've arranged to meet the planning team later this week, after which we'll update on the current position. In the meantime I've published below the planning team's response to my earlier correspondence setting out my concerns about this latest development and the way it's been handled.  

Morning Rob

I had discussed this case with the team last week and we were looking  get something  out to you and Stacey on this ahead of the web site being update – apologies we did not manage to do this, which I appreciate is far from ideal.

However, following protracted legal discussions between ourselves and the operators planning lawyer over the last few months, it was considered that in order to achieve a satisfactory end result in the matter a new Enforcement Notice should be issued. We have therefore had to exercise our powers under Section 173A of the Town and County Planning Act 1990 (as amended) to withdraw the current Notice alleging a breach of condition(s) of planning application DM/19/02315/VOCMW.  However this course of action will allow a revised Enforcement Notice to be issued and it is the team’s intention to work on this as soon as possible and look to get the Notice issued in the near future.  No doubt once this further Enforcement Notice has been issued by ourselves this will lead to a further appeal being submitted to the Planning Inspectorate and you (and the wider residents) will be duly notified of this.

In discussion with the team over the last few weeks it is clear this is a highly complex case with some challenging legal issues; although we also fully appreciate the public perception angle too. It would be helpful to get some time in with you so we can bring you up to date.