A PETITION to stop the closure of a bank in Barnard Castle was delivered on the same day that go-ahead was given for its ATM to be removed.
Durham County Council’s south and west planning committee gave Natwest Bank permission to remove its ATM on Thursday, April 19, only hours after county councillor Richard Bell delivered a petition to the branch manager Nicola Smith. The bank refused photographers permission to capture the handover.
Cllr Bell said: “This disdain and high-handedness has characterised their approach throughout. Unlike public bodies they have nobody to force them to adhere to minimum standards of public engagement and consultation.”
Some 487 people signed the petition calling for Royal Bank of Scotland, which owns Natwest, to reconsider the branch closure.
A bank spokesperson said the closure would go ahead despite the petition because more people are doing their banking digitally.
Cllr Bell said: “Thank you to everyone who took the time to sign – we have not had success but at least we made it harder for them.”
It was Cllr Bell who called for the application to remove the ATM and signage to be taken to the county council’s planning committee, instead of it being dealt with internally by county planning staff.
He said: “It is a sensitive town location and I did not want the bank to take a hasty decision to make the branch unworkable.”
Barnard Castle Town Council supported the application with reservations that the two sills that were modified above the ATM be returned to match their original condition.
The need to retain the night safe was also queried by the town council.
County planners recommended the application for approval because it would “preserve the special architectural and historic interest of the listed building” .
![A COUNTY councillor is backing a campaign to get a pedestrian crossing in Staindrop. Frustrated parish councillors in the village summoned their county council representative Cllr George Richardson to their latest meeting to discuss several issues, including the call for a safe way to cross the A688. Earlier this year their request for a crossing was turned down by the county council’s highways officers. Parish council chairman Jonothan Raper described the reasons for the refusal as “spurious” and called on Cllr Richardson to support their campaign. He added: “One of the arguments they made was there is no clear line of desire when they studied the village – well this isn’t a clear line of desire because there isn’t a crossing, people cross whenever they can. “When the lollipop person was there, one of the things I noticed was people would walk all the way down to the lollipop person to cross the road to go to the shop or to go to the school.” He added a problem of parking at the primary school is exacerbated because people are too afraid to walk their children across the road. Cllr Richardson said he had supported previous attempts for a crossing point with the first being made about 15 years ago. He added: “We went fairly well down the road with that and they looked into it. The only recommended place was where the bus stop is and to get the visibility splays, people on the other side of the road would lose their parking. “That didn’t go down well so it just died a death.” Cllr Raper said he suspected the real reason for the officers’ refusal was the cost of installing a crossing. He added that much of the cost could be recovered from savings made on not having to employ a lollipop patrol. Cllr Raper said: “A lollipop person only provides a benefit of crossing for three hours of the day. You are getting 21 extra hours of crossing time [with a pedestrian crossing].” Cllr Richardson said he would raise the issue with the county council’s cabinet member for highways, Cllr John Shuttleworth.](https://teesdalemercury.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/georgeR-120x86.jpg)
