My letter to the case officer for the potential St John’s development in Hadston

My letter to the case officer below. Dear Tamsin, I write to you in relation to planning application 18/03055/FUL | Erection of 14 dwellings for social housing | Land North West of Hadston Community Centre St. Johns Estate South Broomhill Northumberland. Firstly, I want to make absolutely clear to anyone reading this, that I am in FULL support of Social Housing to meet the need in my community, but I cannot support the chosen site or plans as they currently stand. I welcome the intentions of the Social Housing provider to try and meet some need but feel a more active approach with the community may well have brought about a more palatable and well thought through scheme. The allocated site may well be owned by the applicant, but it plays a significant role in this community as an open space. Somewhere enjoyed by many hundreds of residents who pass the space while coming from estates to the shopping centre, community centre and doctors. I would not welcome the removal of this site for housing, while it is not our job to comment on other sites in the community, it is clear to me that far more suitable sites exist which are also in the applicant's ownership. This former Castle Morpeth Land was transferred so many years ago along with all the housing stock, I believe this was a huge mistake of the then Borough Council. Therefore, in my opinion this open green/public space should remain as such and in the ownership of the community to enjoy. It appears to me that the "in use" Castle Morpeth Planning Policies protect this land as a public space. I appreciate the age of these plans, also that they relate to a Council that no longer exists however, that is a fall-back position created by the Council itself since the removal of the Core Strategy for Northumberland. I, therefore, believe that the mechanism for refusal stands clear in those aged but relevant policies. However, should that itself not be enough I turn my comments to that of access. It is my firm belief that the housing estate of St. Johns is NOT in anyway shape or form a suitable access for a site like this. Built in the 60's, St. Johns was not designed for modern day vehicle numbers per property and most definitely not to furnish another estates access. I am sure highways themselves will raise issue and would be happy to meet an officer on site and show them exactly the issues that makes this unacceptable. Given that this estate is a difficult estate to navigate at the best of times, it would trouble me on a safety aspect, as well as noise and disruption were this to be approved. You only need to visit St. Johns to see an estate under pressure and that is without the additional access proposals. I have major concerns about the highway safety using St. John's as an access, I believe that an adjoining road to another estate will provide a sever risk to those already living there and those that use the estate to connect to other parts of the village. During the time of construction if this site is approved it would cause even greater risk to those who live there. My community welcomes social housing in appropriate locations, we want homes to furnish the needs of our community and support our independent traders thrive on the shopping precinct, but we cannot just allow development in any area to achieve that, especially at the loss of green space for children and residents to enjoy. I would urge a rethink on this, I would urge the applicant to work with the community to look at suitable sites that could accommodate everyone's needs while ensuring we have appropriate levels of green space maintained in the centre of our community. I hope the planning department listen to the views of locals, recommends refusal of this application and the applicant works with the community to find a site supported by all. Best wishes Cllr Scott Dickinson County Councillor Druridge Bay