Council Flip-Flop On Belper Lane Planning Application

A dramatic last-minute repeal was granted to the Belper Lane development as Amber Valley Borough Council referred the controversial application back to the planning board.

Planning permission was first granted on December 18 last year for Wheeldon Brothers to build 65 homes, however, concerns were made about the decision process particularly given its closeness to the UNESCO World Heritage Site.

Unlike the Bullsmoor site application, the Secretary Of State declined to call-in this decision and it seemed that the development was moving forward.

Events changed on February 19 when the decision was put on hold by the Council. At the time AVBC stated that “expert legal opinion is being sought urgently in order to provide advice to the Council and Planning Board on the issues raised above…specifically on the implications of ‘revocation’ of the planning permission.”

Increasing pressure mounted on the Council from both local residents and Councillors. Cllr Ben Bellamy (Lab) submitted a motion to revoke the permission and legal advice was sought for a Judicial review to be held on the application.

Belper Lane site plan

On March 2nd the Council decided, having received ‘expert legal opinion,’ that it would return the Belper Lane application to the planning board to be re-examined from scratch.

This revised report will focus in particular on the balancing exercise required under paragraph 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which states “Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use”.

Cllr Ben Bellamy said: “I don’t believe that they had a choice here – there were huge flaws with the planning report and misrepresentations of consultees. A fair report is unlikely, in my opinion, to recommend the application.”

Cllr Buttery, Leader of AVBC, said: “I have discussed the issues with the relevant officers and been advised of independent legal opinion.

Having considered all the circumstances, I believe the correct course of action is to refer the planning application back to the Planning Board.”

Paul Terry, a member of the community group against new homes on Belper Lane, said: “The report now has to be rewritten and will go before the planning board on the 16th April.  It seems the only sensible decision and I hope that the correct information is put before the elected members.”

The planning board meeting for Belper Lane AVA/2017/1128 will be held on 16th April.

2 thoughts on “Council Flip-Flop On Belper Lane Planning Application

  • 17th March 2018 at 10:49 am

    Its the planning board that should be scrapped and start again, they couldn’t make a decent decision if they tried. All they are doing is wasting public money.

  • 20th March 2018 at 7:55 pm

    It’s simply ridiculous. There are sites , brownfield sites, that can be built on but they are ignored. The Stevenson’s site at Bullbridge is stood doing nothing yet idiots think building on green land is a better option.
    There are houses standing derelict in Amber Valley but rather than rebuilding they lay empty whilst so called ‘experts’ try and force through buildings on land that doesn’t need to be built on.
    And looking at houses being built, Crich being a prime example, which of these houses are actually affordable? 2 sites in Crich consisting of 3 and 4 bedroom properties. Pray, do tell me who can afford those houses.

    If councils and planners continue to build in this reckless manner, the World Heritage status will be taken away. And it won’t just be taken away from Belper, they will take it away from Derbyshire all together. And that would destroy communities and the Amber Valley is less time than it takes to be insensitive and to build on land that should not be built on.
    The planners and the councils should feel one thing if this goes ahead. Ashamed.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *