Proposed redevelopment of Rushden Hospital site (Northamptonshire)

Tuesday 7th December 2010

(13 years, 11 months ago)

Petitions
Read Hansard Text
The Humble Petition of residents of Rushden, Northamptonshire and the surrounding areas,
Sheweth that the proposed redevelopment of the Rushden Hospital site for housing is unpopular, ill-advised and detrimental to the residents of Rushden; that over 25% of the residents of Rushden petitioned the House of Commons for a new outpatient facility in the town, the majority wanting the new facility on the Rushden hospital site; that the proposal to build housing on the site instead of an NHS facility is unacceptable and the impact on the surrounding roads of a large housing development and the density of the development and the proposed cut-through to the Greenacre Drive Estate is wholly detrimental to local residents.
Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House urges the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to urge the Department of Health to withdraw the planning application and further urges him to request that the District Council of East Northamptonshire and the County Council and the Primary Care Trust work together to provide a suitable health facility on the site.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, &c.—[Presented by Mr Peter Bone, Official Report, 20 July 2010; Vol. 514, c. 320.]
[P000844]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government:
The proposal relating to the redevelopment of the Rushden Hospital site for housing is a local matter. East Northamptonshire District Council is responsible for the day to day planning control in its area, and the Secretary of State cannot comment on the merits or otherwise of any application. The Government’s policy is not to interfere with the jurisdiction of a local planning authority unless it is necessary to do so. This is because local authority councillors are elected to represent the views of local people and, in the main, it is these councillors who are in the best position to decide whether a development should go ahead. It is, of course, for local planning authorities to provide whatever justification it may be appropriate to give for their decisions and procedures.
In determining a planning application the local planning authority who have full knowledge of the local circumstances, are required to have regard to all material considerations including the development plan, national policies and views expressed by third parties.
The Secretary of State might decide to call-in the application for his own determination if he considers that it raises matters of more than local importance. Such cases may include, for example, those which, in his opinion:
may conflict with national policies on important matters;
could have significant effects beyond their immediate locality;
give rise to substantial regional or national controversy;
raise significant architectural and urban design issues; or
may involve the interests of national security or of foreign Governments.
The Secretary of State’s policy is to be very selective whether to call-in an application as it is possible that this proposal may, at some future date, come within his jurisdiction. It would therefore be inappropriate to comment on the issues raised in the petition.