THE Hamsterley Forest Planning Application that was submitted almost two years ago has still not been heard and therefore decided.
The application by Forestry England, Forest Holidays and Go Ape was first submitted in November 2024 and deferred four times by the planning department of Durham County Council.
The application has been delayed and facing public scrutiny for over 20 months and a recent, similar application has been rejected in Derbyshire by the Planning Inspectorate. The Hamsterley application includes permission to build 70 timber holiday cabins with hot tubs and a new camping/bunkhouse site; a net-zero visitor centre, upgraded café space and an extended car park as well as a Go Ape rope course in Windy Bank Wood.
Local residents as well as those from farther afield have made scores of objections, not least about the fact that there is no mains water supply or mains drainage in the forest – foul water will be discharged into the local becks. The ‘accepted’ effect on wildlife and the environment has led to formal objections by the Environment Agency and Durham Wildlife Trust. Disagreements persist about the accuracy of traffic data, not least because the main road into Hamsterley village and a main route to the forest has been closed for well over three years. The road was affected by the nearby river Wear and closed but there has been no news about when it will re-open or a new one will be provided.
Meanwhile, a similar application in Derbyshire has been rejected by the local authority there although that one would also involve felling 1,300 trees and potentially disturb fragile peatland. The affect on wildlife would be the same as well as heavy vehicle congestion on the narrow roads leading to the site. This refusal has given fresh hope to objectors of the Hamsterley application. The result in Derbyshire, which is a similar county to Durham with similar geographical landscapes, will be difficult to dismiss by Durham County Council, especially when in Derbyshire, the first reason for refusal was cited as: ‘The proposed development, by reason of its scale and remote location in relation to settlements and public transport, does not constitute sustainable development…”
As one of the Hamsterley’s objectors put it ‘Hamsterley’s planning risks are demonstrably stronger than those that resulted in refusal at Farley Moor.’
The objector who doesn’t want to be named continued, ‘The relevance to the Hamsterley Forest application is immediate and difficult to dismiss. The proposed development would create a substantial new, long-term demand for water while proposing major treated-effluent discharges into Bedburn Beck and Euden Beck.’
Meanwhile villagers and other objectors await a date from Durham County Council Planning Committee for when the application will be discussed.
