Duke of Northumberland's property company launches appeal against Prudhoe planning decision

Members of the Tynedale Local Area Comnmittee twice refused controversial plans by the developer to build 63 new homes on land south of Broomhouse Lane in Prudhoe.

But the company, which acts as the Duke of Northumberland’s property arm, has said councillors “disregarded” planning advice and refused permission “without good reason”.

The plans were strongly criticised by local residents, with concerns raised about access to the site through Tilley Crescent, currently a cul-de-sac.

Councillors voted to refuse the plans by five votes to four, with Cllr Nick Morphet proposing refusal on the grounds of a lack of information on housing need in Prudhoe, the loss of amenity for residents of Tilley Crescent and a lack of information on sustainability.

However, other members were concerned these reasons were not strong enough if the case went to appeal – Cllr John Riddle branded the move “crazy” while Cllr Derek Kennedy said the developer “will take us apart”.

Northumberland Estates’ director of planning and development, Colin Barnes, said: “The application was thoroughly considered by the Council’s planning officers, who have recommended approval twice.

“Unfortunately, the committee members disregarded that advise and denied the application without good reason, despite being informed that doing so could result in a cost award against them. Whilst we always strive to resolve matters with the council, it was not possible in this case, hence the appeal.”

Cllr Gordon Stewart, who represents the Prudhoe South ward that includes the proposed site, called for compromise.

He said: “I actively campaigned against this application, and spoke to many residents time after time to seek their views. As I was so proactive in opposing the application and speaking against it at the two meetings I was not permitted to vote.

“I, like many of the residents, expected an appeal to be brought. I am disappointed that the applicant is pushing for this rather than engaging with the community and seeking some form of compromise.

“I would have preferred to have a sit down with the applicant and seek a solution agreeable to both sides. This appeal will cause so much stress upon many residents, while also being both time consuming and expensive.”