At  the Public Meeting held on Thursday 19th March at St. Mary’s Meeting Room at 7pm it was resolved unanimously that:
This meeting supports the seven Great Aycliffe County Councillors in their efforts to retain the street lights along the A167 between the A1M and Rushyford on the grounds that the removals are contrary to agreed policy and this main arterial road cannot be categorised as “rural”.
The meeting further expressed the view that the removal of lights would cause danger to road users, cyclists and pedestrians and does not take into consideration the current high usage and the future expansion of housing and industry this road will  feed.
The Vice Chairman Ken Robson was delegated to ask the following public questions at County Hall.
The Great Aycliffe Public Meeting after hearing all the facts and figures, voted unanimously against the removal, and request the County Council consider rescinding their previous decision as the consultation process was deemed to be flawed.
It appears the decision to remove A167 lights was lost in the general policy to save on the cost of lighting.
It is only after it came to the notice of the general public how badly the A167 was being affected that the public outcry is now being heard by not only the residents of the Newton Aycliffe area. Other residents of settlements situated alongside the busy road are also beginning to express their displeasure at this decision. These settlements being Aycliffe village, Chilton, Ferryhill and Spennymoor.
Is the Council satisfied the policy change was understood and communicated properly to the general public?
How many members of the public were in fact consulted ?
When Residents’ Associations call for clarification do we not deserve attention with the officer and Cabinet Councillor, responsible for the topic, attending the meeting?
On investigation and having sight of the plans we seek clarification on the County Council’s specific areas which they term “rural”. Where they state lighting can be safely removed.?
The following questions were asked by members of the Residents’ Association:
As the A167 is a main arterial route through the County can the Council please define rural areas along the A167.?
Is this where there is no footfall?
Has the County Council discussed issues of Health & Safety, Road Accidents, dangers to cyclists and walkers plus potential increase in crime?
Why not turn off every other light?
Why not use alternative modern and much cheaper lighting to get the same monetary savings?
Why remove lampposts altogether?
If the A1M is closed at our junctions the A167 becomes the alternative route has this been considered?
The A167 is a main arterial route through the County carrying goods services and workers between settlements and beyond. Would you agree that any disruption of traffic flow could have severe financial results on the local economy?
If statistics later show this to be highly dangerous and the wrong decision will the Council re-instate lampposts and is there a budget to cover this expense?
Is it not wrong when the “spotlight” is on Aycliffe Business Park as the biggest in our County and potentially the biggest industrial area in the north east to turn lights off to its approach?
What does this say to visitors and possible investors about Aycliffe Business Park?
Have risk assessments been carried out by the emergency services.?