The Castle Morpeth Community Partnership meeting scheduled for Monday 20 July 2026 was set to address public questions, consider petitions, and discuss safety concerns at Oakland Park. The meeting's agenda indicated that discussions would focus on issues raised by residents and the council's response to them.

Public Question Time

The meeting was scheduled to include a session for public questions. As per the council's agreement in February 2012, the chair of the committee had discretion over the management of this time. Questions could be submitted in writing in advance or asked at the meeting, concerning issues for which the council holds responsibility. However, questions could be rejected if they involved confidential or exempt information, were defamatory, frivolous, offensive, substantially the same as previous questions, or if the cost of answering was disproportionate. Written answers from a previous meeting on 18 May 2026 were provided for members' information.

Petitions

The partnership was scheduled to receive any new petitions, with the lead petitioner having the opportunity to briefly introduce it. A response to these new petitions would be organised for a future meeting. Additionally, the meeting was set to consider reports on petitions previously received.

Oakland Park - Safety Concerns

A significant item on the agenda was the consideration of a report concerning safety concerns at Oakland Park. This report was in response to a petition signed by 65 residents of Oakland Park, who raised issues regarding the safety of estate roads, particularly during winter conditions, due to delays in the adoption of these roads.

The petition requested that Northumberland County Council provide a clear explanation for the delay in adopting Oakland Park, confirm the current status of the adoption process and any outstanding issues, and progress the adoption as soon as possible. It also suggested considering adoption under Section 37 or 228 of the Highways Act 1980 if the existing process had stalled. Furthermore, the petition requested interim winter safety measures, such as the installation of salt/grit bins, until adoption was completed.

The report indicated that Oakland Park remained an unadopted private development, meaning responsibility for maintenance, including winter treatment, rested with the developer until adoption. Adoption was being progressed under a Section 38 Agreement under the Highways Act 1980¹, which requires the resolution of land ownership matters, drainage approval, construction to an adoptable standard, and a 12-month maintenance period before transfer. The report stated that current delays were related to legal land ownership matters outside the Council's control, and therefore no confirmed timescale for adoption could be provided.

Regarding winter maintenance, the Council's Winter Service Policy prioritises treatment on a defined precautionary network, and it is not considered reasonably practicable to treat all roads. Residential estate roads would not normally be included, even when adopted, unless specific criteria were met. The report noted that where locations do not meet criteria, Town and Parish Councils may purchase 'green grit bins', funded locally.

The report proposed that the Council would continue to engage with Story Homes² to support the progression of the Section 38 adoption process, provide updates on material changes in adoption status, and undertake a post-adoption assessment of the estate in line with the Council's Winter Service Policy, including consideration of grit bin provision where appropriate.