Green Belt Deletions in Amber Valley

Space to build 2,010 extra houses in Amber Valley by 2028 is set to be freed up by deleting land from the protected green belt.

Last month, the Local Democracy Reporting Service revealed the details of sites which were being touted by Amber Valley Borough Council to be deleted from the green belt to make way for housing. This was part of the authority’s first green belt land review for 30 years. Many of the sites in the leaked documents have now been confirmed by the borough council.

Overall, it is seeking to add 14 extra sites to its Local Plan – a blueprint for future development – by deleting land from the green belt.

Here are the 14 sites, followed by the number of houses that could be built on them:

Far Laund, Belper – 345

Alfreton Road, Codnor – 12

Crosshill, Codnor – 81

Cumberhills Road, Duffield – 175

Wirksworth Road, Duffield – 70

Chesterfield Road, Heage – 180

Ilkeston Road, Heanor – 35

Peatburn Avenue, Heanor – 140

Newlands Road, Riddings – 38

Derby Road, Ripley – 73

Heage Road, Ripley – 200

Nottingham Road, Ripley – 355

Pear Tree Avenue, Ripley – 146

Upper Marehay Road, Ripley – 15

Councillors are set to thrash out the pros and cons of the proposed sites at a meeting of the full council on Monday, 4th March 2019.

Extra sites are, in part, required due to the shortfall in houses which could be completed during the remaining nine years of the Local Plan – which runs from 2011 to 2028.   To cater for this, more sites have been identified which, could see 1,220 houses built on the above sites by March 31, 2024 and 2,010 by 2028. Some of the proposed sites would see more houses built outside of this period, notably, the council’s flagship development at Cinderhill, near Denby.

This scheme had already seen 200 acres of green belt earmarked for deletion.

The developers, Cinderhill Harworth, say that, of the 3,000 houses proposed, 200 could be built by 2024 and 700 by 2028.

This development would also see a new junction off the A38 and nearly 30 acres of space for new businesses.

In total, the Local Plan forecasts up to 13,252 houses being built in the borough by 2028, with a minimum target set of 9,770 – 575 per year.

Ripley is to see the lion’s share of the housing built on deleted green belt land.

By the end of the Local Plan it is set to see 964 additional houses as result of these proposed developments. This would further add to new housing being built around the town, with 400 approved at Peasehill, Ripley before Christmas.

Belper is the also to see an influx of 345 houses at land off Far Laund, currently in the green belt, by 2028. However, Belper is also set to see a large area of land, locally known as Bullsmoor, added into the green belt. It had been the proposed site for a major extension to Vaillant’s factory and hundreds of houses, but these were rejected by the borough council and government planning inspectors.

Duffield is also to see a sizeable influx with 245 extra houses added into the plan, again on what is currently green belt. These would be split between 175 off Cumberhills Road and 70 off Wirksworth Road, close to Duffield Meadows Primary School.

The villages of Mapperley and Marehay would be “inset” into the green belt. This would mean that they would entirely encircled by protected land, but the development in the villages themselves would not in the green belt.

Meanwhile, 1.2 acres of land on the outskirts of Codnor, next to a wooded area, could be deleted from the green belt to make space for 10 traveller pitches.

The borough council had been forging ahead with its Local Plan but called for a pause in proceedings to find more sites for housing. At the time, it had only just managed to find five years’ worth of housing (5.03 years).

Officers felt this could still leave the authority vulnerable to housing developers, who could argue not enough space was being earmarked for future properties. Without a Local Plan, the report states, there is a risk to the council of having an “inability to resist proposals for major housing development through planning applications, or to successfully defend any refusal of planning permission for such proposals through the appeal process”.

Launching the green belt land review, through consultants DLP Planning Ltd, caused controversy. This was due to the firm “boasting all over Twitter” about securing controversial planning permissions on green belt. The firm responded that it was completely independent and follows a strict code of conduct and industry standards when carrying out its work.

With the addition of the new sites, the Local Plan would have enough housing to last 6.13 years – this rate “allows for changes in circumstances that could reduce expected delivery rates”.

Another housing site, not in the green belt, would also be added to the Local Plan, at Outseats Farm, Alfreton, with all housing thought to come forward after 2024.

Belper residents are still arguing in favour of using brownfield (previously used, derelict) sites and protecting Green Belt land.

2 thoughts on “Green Belt Deletions in Amber Valley

  • 2nd March 2019 at 2:29 pm
    Permalink

    we will be attending the public meeting at Ripley council house
    on Monday 4th March 2019 ,to discuss the plans you have published
    and to put forward our own suggestions

    Reply
  • 4th March 2019 at 6:41 pm
    Permalink

    Another 345 houses on this side of Belper would make traffic even worse than it is now and what about school places?
    Is the extension to St Johns primary going to take care of it?
    I think not. It seems madness to me to allow this to go ahead.
    Belper , it seems to me is bursting at the seams already and housing is already being built in Derwent St.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

GDPR, Your Data and Us: http://nailed.community/gdpr-your-data-and-us/

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.