Printed below a chronology and statement regarding the County Durham Plan – the regeneration blueprint for the next 20 years in County Durham.
Background/chronology:
April 25, 2014 – Durham County Council submits the County Durham Plan to Government
October/November 2014 – Examination in Public held.
February 18, 2015 – Harold Stephens publishes his interim report post examination.
Findings include:
• The vision for a successful local economy incorporates unrealistic assumptions about jobs growth;
• The Strategic Economic Plan is ‘evidently very ambitious’;
• The objective assessment of housing needs is too high;
• The spatial distribution is not justified particularly for Durham City;
• The process and evidence relating to the proposed amendments to the Green Belt boundary are flawed; and
• The proposed Western and Northern Relief Roads are not justified, deliverable or environmentally acceptable.
The Report gave the council three options:
a. Continue the examination – but Inspector concludes that he would then find the Plan unsound;
b. Suspend the Examination –  but Inspector believed that the Plan could not be rectified within a reasonable timescale and would require a significantly different plan; or
c. Withdraw the Plan.
February 25th, 2015 – businesses and employers attend a breakfast event called by Sir John Hall in support of the Plan.

April 2, 2015 – the council meets with the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) to outline its concerns. PINS offers a 4th possible ‘hybrid’ option involving a further Examination In Public (EIP) session to discuss the council’s concerns.
April 21, 2015 – Following positive signals from both Government and the PINS the council writes to the Planning Inspector, Harold Stephens, requesting he reopen the examination to consider our serious concerns regarding his interim report.
May 8, 2015 – Mr Stephens responds confirming he will not reopen the examination as requested.
May 15, 2015 – Council lodges Judicial Review papers at Leeds High Court.
May 18, 2015 – deadline to submit Judicial Review.
Statement:
Ian Thompson – corporate director of regeneration and economic development – said:
“Following a constructive meeting with the Planning Inspectorate we had hoped there would be further examination in public hearing sessions to explore the points we referred to in our letter to the inspector.
“Consequently, it came as a disappointment that the Planning Inspector has now declined to reopen the examination so that our concerns can be fully explored in the public domain. The impartial advice we have received since the inspector’s report was published supports our commitment to the soundness of the Plan’s forecasts for job creation and homes. We maintain the Plan offers the best prospect for economic growth and a once in a generation opportunity to see our county deliver on its potential to safeguard the sort of life we want every resident to have the opportunity to strive for.
“We have explored every option and opportunity in our efforts to demonstrate this, which has included employing independent planning experts to review our business-backed predictions for growth.
“We now have no choice but to pursue this matter through the courts by way of a Judicial Review. This is not a decision we take lightly. This is not the position we hoped to be in.”