PLANS to redevelop a derelict former school and surrounding grounds into housing in Gainford have taken a leap forward.
After years of delays, Kebbell Development Ltd has submitted a planning application to Durham County Council to redevelop the former St Peter’s School site on the outskirts of the village.
The plans include 57 properties on an estate which would consist of 34 two, three and four-bedroom houses, three three-bedroom terraced houses and 11 two-bedroom bungalows.
The remaining school building would be converted into nine one and two-bedroom apartments. The development would include affordable housing units.
Gainford and Langton Parish Council chairwoman, Lisa Johnstone, welcomed the application.
She said: “As chairwoman of the parish council, I would support the right kind of development for St Peter’s and hope it brings an end to the eyesore that has become a blight on the village.
“It seems like there is a good range of types of properties.
“I think the bungalows and apartments would be suitable for perhaps older people who might want to downsize.
“It is definitely a step in the right direction.”
The plan envisages homes laid out in a number of short cul-de-sacs with all properties restricted to a maximum of two-storeys in height.
Houses will be outward facing along the A67 in keeping with the existing building line provided by the former school.
Significant areas of landscaping have also been included in the plans including the retention of some of the existing trees.
Existing vehicular access from the A67 would serve the site. It is predicted that the homes will only create small levels of additional traffic which will not have much impact on the local highway.
The plans for the site were first unveiled during a public consultation event held by Kebbell Development Ltd in the village hall in April. More than 100 people attended the event.
According to the developer, the response to the proposals was “overwhelmingly positive” with 97 per cent of those who commented backing the plans and none directly opposing the scheme.
While Kebbell owns part of the site, some of the land is in the hands of another developer.
Discussions between the two are ongoing, however, an agreement is unlikely to be reached until a decision on the planning application has been made.
Built in 1899, St Peter’s School was initially an orphanage and then became a residential school until it closed in 1983. In 1986, it became a nursing home but this closed in 1998. It has remained empty ever since.
Two years ago, the majority of the building was badly damaged by a fire. Only the far north western and south eastern parts of the building remain standing.
![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)
