Dear Editor,
With reference to an article which was published in edition 183 about the proposals to build yet another housing development at York Hill Road. In furtherance to that submission I wrote to our MP Alan Strickland and raised concerns on behalf of all Spennymoor residents that there were no clear tangible improvements in infrastructure to accommodate the increase in population of the town, save for Springmoor school and the afterthought safety lane on Whitworth Road at the entrance to Burton Woods estate. Those concerns were put to Mr Strickland on the 31st May and a reply from Durham County Council has now been passed to me via his office in the House of Commons.
As is the case when a local authority or an official body responds to a question from an MP, their reply is often shrouded in Government jargon. I shall not bother the reader with the reply in full, but when it comes to development in and around our town it opens with a mention of Sedgefield Borough District Council [SBDC}. That council ceased to exist on April 1st 2009 when it became part of the unitary authority. Totally irrelevant in 2026. In 2014 the old SBDC development plans had little by way of influence on the first version of the County Durham Plan. It estimated how many new homes would be needed within the county to cater for the absurd 100,000 jobs that DCC “claimed” to be able to attract here by the year 2035. At a public hearing the plan was deemed procedurally unsound and overly optimistic and was subsequently withdrawn for amendment. It resurfaced in 2019 and following further concerns from various bodies, a public inquiry was set up. It ran for 12 days over the period October 2019 to February 2020. Another marginally amended version was subsequently adopted by DCC in late 2020.
Things have changed dramatically since Labour came to power as Alan Strickland MP will attest and given what appears in the reply from DCC ,their hands are tied. As far as you and I are concerned, the welfare of our town and community counts for absolutely nothing where over development is concerned.
In bringing this to a close let me just enlighten you. Quote: “under paragraph 11[d] of this Government’s national planning policy framework there is what is termed a ‘ tilted balance'” unquote. The planning department’s decision in respect of York Hill concluded that the “identified harms” did not significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the development as per the aforementioned guidance.
I have asked Mr Strickalnd time and again where is the evidence of investment in our infrastructure to match the increase in population? I am thinking specifically of access to NHS services, [GP’s, dentists,] the Police, even road access and safety measures? He assures me that it is all taken into account when planning applications are submitted.
The political life of an MP is ephemeral and as Mr Strickland’s own slogan which appears in this paper quite often is, and I quote ” Standing up for the people of Spennymoor and Tudhoe” unquote, then perhaps he would like to clarify for his constituents just exactly what those “identified harms” are? I suspect, they affect our already severly tested, overstretched services, and inadequate road infrastructure and safety concerns? Perhaps our MP would care to respond and reassure us all that this is not the case? I am happy for him to refute my assumptions
Yours sincerely,
Mr P Laidler, by email
Spennymoor's local community newspaper.
