Council park funding criticised

Two Sedgefield councillors have criticised a decision to allocate £234,000 of housing developer contributions to improvements at Hardwick Park.

Durham County Council’s Section 106 (S106) Panel approved the funding for improvements to the infant play space at the council-owned park.

But Independent councillor Chris Lines and Reform councillor Ian Catchpole said the money should instead be used to support local sports and community projects in Sedgefield.

Cllr Lines said he supported the improvements to Hardwick Park but did not believe they should be funded using S106 money linked to housing developments in Sedgefield, saying the money had instead been “ring-fenced for sport and open space schemes” and was intended to mitigate the impact of new developments on local communities.

Instead, he says the council should use its own capital funding to maintain and improve the park, which receives about 500,000 visits a year, and is listed as the county’s third most popular tourist attraction.

Durham County Council said it had previously used S106 funding to support sports clubs in Sedgefield, but no other applications were received for the remaining money within the required timeframe. 

The authority added that the Hardwick Park project was considered to offer significant benefits to the local community, including children, and it was willing to meet the councillors to discuss their concerns.

As Sedgefield’s population has grown since the S106 money was provisionally allocated to sports projects, participation in some sports has also increased.

“The need for more and better sports facilities has escalated,” Cllr Lines added.

Sedgefield Town Council and Fishburn Parish Council also opposed the S106 Hardwick Park application.

Cllr Lines added: “Local grassroots sports projects will now miss out on the opportunity to access vital capital funds that could have delivered more and better facilities for residents of all ages.”

The Reform-led administration’s decision was also criticised by the party’s ward member Ian Catchpole, who said he objected because he did not believe the decision reflected what local people wanted or what developer contributions were intended for.

“Sedgefield Town Council, both of your local county councillors, all pointed in the same direction,” he said.

“We stood together, spoke with one voice, and yet that voice was ignored.”

Councillor Catchpole said S106 contributions were secured because housing development placed additional pressures on local communities and that residents expected the money to be invested “where those impacts are felt”.

Reacting to the decision, he said he wanted answers about how the decision was reached and why local views had not been given greater weight.

“This isn’t about politics. It’s about fairness, transparency and respecting local democracy,” he added.

S106 agreements are used by councils to secure contributions from developers towards infrastructure and facilities needed as a result of new development.

Stephen Reed, Durham County Council’s planning manager, said: “We always look to work proactively with the local community to identify opportunities to spend Section 106 money in a timely manner and have previously supported a number of local sport clubs in the Sedgefield area through this approach. 

“However, we had further funding available that needed to be allocated but received no other applications for the money within the required time period. After careful consideration of the Hardwick Park proposal, it was identified as a development that would provide great value and benefit to the community, including local children from the Sedgefield area.

“We are happy to meet with Cllr Catchpole and Cllr Lines to discuss any concerns they may have with the proposal.”