Prevent Mass Development of Ponteland -Act Now Responses needed by 23 Dec

As mentioned in our previous post please find a link to the following documents.

A suggested draft response to the Supplementary Planning Document –

You can use the template as is but it would be great if you could add your own comments.

A  draft  objection response to the Banks Group outline planning permission application

Re the Core Strategy Major Modifications Document – This  response has to relate to the ‘Soundness’ of the Plan. NCC are attempting to get Dissington Garden Village in through the ‘back door’. They have not consulted with Ponteland residents – the Major Modifications are unsound. Many of you have authorised PGBG to act on your behalf – thank you. If you wish us to respond on your behalf please send an email to

pontgreenbeltgroup@btconnect.com

An information leaflet  is also provided

Remember the cut off date  is 23 Dec

1-banks-outline-application-objection

2-spd-response

3-information-leaflet-dec-2016

Please note – we are NOT against  development. Ponteland already has over 650 houses in the completions and approved applications  pipeline without the developments listed above.

Is it not ironic that the two large developments that are proposed include the word “village” in the title- A promotional gimmick to exploit the attractive  character of Ponteland – exactly what will be lost once the developers have made their huge  profits and long gone.

It is considered that the higher housing growth option, requiring 1,000 new dwellings over the plan period could begin to compromise the character of the town’ (Quote from NCC expert analysis Oct 2013)

We are looking at over 3000 new dwellings

How about this quote from NCC

Projected population change – as a guide, it has been considered than on average an acceptable increase in population for Main Towns is between 10% and 19%, 4% and 8% for Service Centres and around 4% in the rest of the County.

We are currently looking at population increase of 69%

or what about this quote from NCC.

We have maintained our position that, in acknowledgement of the need to accommodate proportionate growth in Ponteland over the plan period, an element of Green Belt deletion will be required

Is what is being proposed “proportionate” growth? An element of  Green Belt ?

NCC are proposing to delete 411 Hectares across the entire County , 228 Hectares of that Green Belt land is in  Ponteland – an unjustified 51.7% of the total.