The Government has announced that it has received applications from 371 different towns in a bid to become one of the 12 Portas Pilots areas, with the chance to receive a share of £1.2 million to help redevelop their high streets and to receive support from the Government and Mary Portas herself. The results of this competition will be announced in May. Meanwhile, Local Government Minister Grant Shapps has announced a further round of pilots to trial some of the recommendations made in Mary Portas’ review. The 12 pilot projects will be supported with funding of up to £100,000 per pilot. Applications are welcomed from local partnerships and consortiums in England. Eligible partnerships must identify an Accountable Body (local authority) to receive the grant, if they are not, themselves, a local authority. It is expected that local authorities in receipt of the grant will work constructively with their communities, through their Town Team, in using the funding. Proposals will be assessed on the following criteria: Mix Strong leadership Commitment Potential for improvement Innovation In addition to the ‘Portas Plus’ programme, Grant Shapps has also announced: A £1 million Future High Street X-Fund, which will be awarded to areas with the most creative and effective schemes to rejuvenate their town centres. A National Markets Day, launching a National Markets Fortnight, to celebrate the role markets can play and offer budding entrepreneurs the chance to test their business ideas. A £500,000 fund for Business Improvement Districts, to help town centres access loans for their set-up costs. An application deadline for the new round of the Portas Pilots scheme has yet to be announced.

Organised by Councillor Alex Stevenson:

12.30pm on 4th June 2012, Heanor, Marpool and Shipley will have the opportunity to join in a Queens Diamond Jubilee Celebration Event organised by Local Conservative Councilors’ who have worked with Police to close off Ilkeston Road, Hardy Barn and Hassock Lane North, all decorated with Commonwealth Flags to allow the High Society Military Brass Band, from Kent, to march from Marlpool Church to Shipley Garden Centre, to celebrate the Queens Diamond Jubilee.

The event is also being supported by the Shipley Woman’s Institute who will gift every child from Shipley with a commemorative designed mug, and serve refreshments from Shipley Parish Rooms. Commemorative mugs are available to buy for non Shipley residents.

Funding the events are:

Walsh School of Motoring (Underwood) £5.00
NewsCard (Marlpool) £100.00
Jacksons Chippie (Ilkeston) £100.00
Best of Ripley and Heanor £50.00
Queens Head (Marlpool) £260.00
Imperial GB (Langley Mill) £600.00
Don De Rosa (Heanor) £50.00
Shipley Garden Centre (Shipley) £500.00
Shipley Nursing Home (Shipley) £300.00
Dawn Oakely-Wise Accountants (Ripley) £50.00
Travis Perkins (Langley Mill) £50.00
Harveys Builders Ltd (Swanwick) £100.00
Home Finders (Heanor) £10.00
Midway Fencing (Ambergate) £50.00
Shipley Parish Council £200.00
Councillor Kevin Parkinson £1,790.00 (Derbyshire County Council, Members Community Leadership Fund)

Update: 5:22pm Thursday 3rd November 2011

The Appeal will be heard by the Inspector on 13th December at 10am at Heanor Town Council.

To: The Planning Inspector Room: 3/22 (sent on 1st November 2011)
Temple Quay House
2 The Square
Temple Quay
Bristol
BS1 6PN

Reference: APP/M1005/A/11/2160794/NWF

Proposal: Erect 83 dwellings, associated works and demolition of existing agricultural buildings. This is a departure from the Development Plan.

Planning Application Reference: AVA/2011/0075
AVBC Appeal Reference: 11/00011/REF
Appeal Start Date: 23.09.2011
Appellant’s Name: Janet R Riffat, Catherine E Allsop & William Davis Ltd

Dear Sir

As Local Member for Smalley in Amber Valley Borough Council, the planning authority which this application determined by the planning committee was refused and to which this appeal relates, I am writing to set out further information as to why the planning committee’s refusal should be upheld at appeal.

The ‘Appellant’s’ grounds for appeal under their first paragraph are neither robust or relevant, in that across the 8 local planning authorities in Derbyshire, all are finding it difficult to deliver against their 5-year supplies, and all will continue to struggle to adequately demonstrate an extension to these supplies under the proposed draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requirements to have a 6 year supply.

It is not reasonable for the applicant to suggest that the Council has failed to give due weight to the lack of deliverable housing land in the district as required by PPS3 and the emerging NPPF statements, as this application was refused on the lack of affordable housing being proposed which fell far short of the Council’s ‘up to’ 20/30% policy.  I would therefore suggest that the applicant has failed the viable developer test which is an equal consideration in their stated appeal under emerging planning legislation.

In section two of their appeal they claim that again the Council did not give due weight to the viable developer test or the District Valuer (DVS) recommendations even though the planning officer’s determinations covered both the negotiated position of the applicant and the DVS position.

As Local Member, I submitted the objective reasons why I could not support this application, providing coherent reasons against the failure to supply a reasonable affordable housing element, and through the planning officer ‘strongly’ recommended that the applicant consult with an adjoining land owner and developer to determine whether by working together, the two sites would deliver viable housing developments and therefore increase the affordability of this application to deliver an acceptable affordable housing offer.

To date, AVBC officers, and the neighboring land owner and developer have confirmed that this recommendation has not been entered into and this applicant has failed to be realistic about this sites viable development credentials.

I strongly recommend that the Inspector gives due consideration to a number of factors:

1. By upholding the appeal the Heanor Market Area (HMA) will become subject to increased pressures to deliver housing planning permission with low to very low affordable dwelling delivery.  The HMA has delivered ‘Nil’ affordable homes since 2005 when discounting the Registered Social Landlord, (RSL) Amber Valley Housing Limited.

1. By upholding the planning committee decision to refuse this application, the Inspector is honoring the Council’s PPS3 statement, ‘of deliverable housing land’, and H10 Policy, ‘appropriate provision of affordable housing’, which this application and appeal clearly fails to come close to achieving.
2. Without prejudice, the applicant has sighted ‘emerging legislation’, whilst as Local Member, either myself or my community has chosen to exploit, for example their use of NPPF, verses ‘Localism Bill’.
3. Without prejudice, by upholding the planning committee decision to refuse this application, the applicant would be ‘enabled,’ – rightly – to respond to the current freeholder of this site/land, and negotiate better terms and conditions for the sale and transfer that would support a viable – deliverable – housing application with the viable – appropriate provision of affordable housing.
   1. The neighboring land owner and developer who has shared their master plan which includes a significant mixed use development with housing and employment uses, incorporates broader highways (S278) unilateral undertakings, plus, has indicated an intention to effectively and adequately respond to AVBC H10 Policy within their application.

The applicant has failed to give due weight to the strategic options that exist within the immediate area of the HMA and the collaborative commercial options from the existing neighboring planning development site.

By upholding the appeal, the Inspector will exclude the applicants ‘correct ability’, to negotiate new terms with the site freeholder, and pass the viable development test.

I urge the Inspector to uphold the AVBC Local Member and Planning Committee comments, recommendations and refusal.

Yours Sincerely

CC:
Clerk – Smalley Parish Council.

Update: 8:40pm Monday 15th August 2011

Amber Valley’s Planning Board REFUSED this application on the points rasied by myself as Local Member.  Other Members of the Planning Board also agreed that the NHS S106 Contribution, above the need for this application to deliver the Councils minimum Affordable Housing contribution of 20-30% also recieved strong support.

9th August 2011:

Amber Valley Planning Board will receive the planning officers recommendations to approve this substantial housing development application on Monday 15th August at the Ripley Council House at 7pm.

This application is a departure from the local development plan and is a significant reduction in the Council’s 20-30% affordable housing policy, it also dissmisses NHS health care S106 request for £42.5k.

I will be attending the planning board on 15th August to share my views to encourage the planning board not to look favourably on the planning officers recommendation for approval.

Whilst officers are recommending that the Council approves the planning application, on the terms as set out in this report, this recommendation is balanced and should Members be mindful to NOT accept officers’ recommendations the following reasons (amongst other) could be given:

1. The proposal conflicts with the development plan, comprising the East Midlands Regional Plan and the Adopted Local Plan, as it makes inadequate proposals for affordable housing in relation to Regional Plan policy 14 and saved local plan policy H10.
2. The proposal is contrary to the material considerations of Planning Policy Statement 3, in particular as to grant it would undermine the Council’s affordable housing policy contrary to paragraph 69.

Recommendations

2.5% affordable housing provision, with all 3 x 2 bedroom units to be 100% social rented, with the 3 affordable units being delivered at the site within 18 months of works commencing.  This developer offer is significantly outside the saved Local Plan Policy H10, the Council’s SPD: The Provision of Affordable Housing through the Development Process (April 2007), as this proposal would not deliver 20-30% affordable housing at this site.

Negotiated S106 Contributions

£148,877.74 maintenance of on-site public open space contribution.

£95,849.74 education contribution – this is a reduced contribution against the LEA formula.

S278 Highway Contributions

Off-site highway improvements to the Adale Road / Heanor Road junction to accommodate a ‘Ghost Island’ right turn facility into Adale Road are essential improvements to the existing highway network that arise as a direct result of the proposed development and are to be implemented prior to occupation of the first unit on the site and therefore the scheme is on acceptable from a highway point of view in accordance with saved policies LS5 and TP1 of the adopted local plan.

NHS Primary Care Contributions (Ignored)

Officers are recommending that whilst the Primary Care Trust has only indicated that they may seek a contribution of £42,542.48 (£551.25 x 83 dwellings) for the increased demand placed on Primary Care facilities within the locality, because the S278 and S106 contributions above have been negotiated, the NHS health element only carry’s limited weight and is not an essential policy requirement, consequently officers have not looked to secure the healthcare contribution in lieu of negotiating essential provision/contributions for affordable housing, education, on site public open space and off site highway improvements.

It is incorrect for officers to ignore the demand to secure NHS healthcare contributions in reference to essential provision, as clearly the developer negotiations has failed to secure the necessary affordable housing allocation required.

This development falls within the catchment area of the Park Surgery, Heanor and that this surgery currently has a list size that exceeds recommendations and also has insufficient physical space.  Amber Valley also has the highest number of elder resident’s categorised with growing Adult Social Care needs in any of the Borough/Districts in Derbyshire and adequate provision will need to be planned for and funded if residents are to enjoy safe and sustainable continuity of health and care.

If members approve this application on the recommendations in the report by accepting an element of affordable housing well below the standard 20-30% definition in the Local Plan Policy H10, they must require from the developer the PCT contribution of £42,542.48 for the locality.

Affordable Housing

The Housing Needs Survey 2008 identifies a requirement for 285 affordable properties within the local housing market area by 2012.  To date 71 new affordable homes have been built in the entire local housing market area.  The Council’s own Housing Strategy Officer has stated that he cannot support a significant new development that will provide so few new affordable homes.

Members MUST note the very low volume of affordable homes built within the parish since 2008 against the increase of market homes already delivered in determining this application.

Officers recommendation asks members to give due consideration to a relatively high proportion of weight available in this application by suggesting that if this application is not approved then the site could remain vacant and underused with no dwellings, market or affordable, being delivered in the short to medium term, thus not contributing to the general housing supply, or to the Borough’s affordable housing need.

This is misleading and strictly not true if members consider the history of this site.  This is the second application in a few short years, and is contained in the Council’s Local Plan for housing development.  Given the coal open cast cumulative impact and this developer’s ability to secure a very competitive sale price for the land, it is highly likely that further applications will continue to come forward for this site.

Smalley Housing Market

Available Housing stock in the locality covers a range of builds, beds and locations.  Currently there are over twenty properties for sale in the range of £119,500 for a 3 bed semi-detached house through to £550,000 for a 5 bed detached house, both on Main Road, Smalley.

The current ranges of sale prices in Smalley are:

2 Bed House £139,950
2 Bed Bungalow £219,000
3 Bed House £215,000 to £295,000 and average of £259,950
3 Bed Bungalow £189,950
4 Bed House £179,950 to £429,950 and average of £299,500
4 Bed Bungalow £325,000
5 Bed House £299,950 to £550,000 and average of £325,000

Local Member Recommendations

This application is a departure from the Local Development Plan and does not deliver the Councils Local Plan Policy H10 affordable housing contribution and on these principles alone, the planning board should refuse the application.

Whilst S278 highways improvements is accepted, the traffic increases from 83 dwellings will still have a negative impact on the Adale Road/Heanor Road junction.

S106 Developer Contributions, whilst secured for open space, has not delivered the necessary LEA education formula contribution, plus has failed to deliver any NHS health and care contribution.  The planning board MUST balance the need for inward investment, and the Council’s housing target against cumulative impacts and additional pressures on public services.  It is important that the Borough continues to be both an attractive and competitive place for investors and developers but not to the detriment of established settlements that would not be able to sustain significant impacts upon the social fabric and quality of place.

Where separate applications are submitted within close proximity to each other, the Council MUST encourage investors and developers to exhaust ALL cooperation, collaboration and integration options.

A developer offer of 2.5%, 3 affordable units, verses an available housing market provides little or NO opportunity to enhance and enrich the current demographics of the locality.  Accepting such a low expectation inhibits the affordability of the place for existing and future generations.  Heanor and Smalley have a real and direct need to retain and attract young people for local employers and their families for local traders within the locality’s Town Centre in order to sustain the economic prosperity of the area.

If the Council continues to accept housing developments with VERY LOW levels of affordable housing, students and graduates will continue to migrate towards centres that are affordable and provide much needed employment.

Smalley as with all localities across the Borough has a direct need for sustainable health and continuity of care service from the NHS and Local Authority.  Adding a further 83 dwellings to oversubscribed local primary care will have significant impacts on existing families.

Summary:

If the planning board approves this application, due to its scale it must negotiate a higher proportion of affordable housing and a health care contribution.

Council says no to retail development – News – Ilkeston Advertiser http://t.co/cvpHG7S

Local Member Councillor Kevin Parkinson was consulted and commented as follows:

“As local member I strongly support Waystone Ltd as DCC’s preferred developer for Shipley Lakeside. Their regeneration heritage will be an asset for this well adopted community destination.

Shipley is a Green Lung, preventing the Boroughs of Amber Valley and Erewash, and the Market Towns of Heanor and Ilkeston, merging, preventing urban sprawl.

The Lakeside site remains today a regular attraction for local people and visitors from the neighbouring County Country Park. Many daily visitors walk, run and cycle around the area, with fishing being in high demand on the lake, making the area a hive for leisure and recreation activity.

The community and I would like to secure free and open access across the site in any future development.

With many local jobs lost from the closure of the former theme park, it is important that the site delivers strong employment opportunities, from a diverse range of sectors, across the intermediate and professional skill base. Sustainable retail, whilst of some value, must not be of a scale to present any further decline in either Heanor or Ilkeston.

Equally any heavy industry including logistics is neither appropriate for the site and local infrastructure, nor fitting with the surrounding area.

It is my opinion that any housing development is inappropriate for Shipley Lakeside, given the need to protect Shipley’s Green Lung and the need to protect free and open access, for the community to continue its leisure and recreational uses of the site.I believe private residences on Shipley Lakeside would both set a precedent for more housing in the future, conflicting with a community asset, and losing the important ability of preventing urban sprawl.

I, therefore, oppose housing development. However, I would support health and social care residential development and temporary accommodation to support any commerce on the site, providing there is no community access reduction.

Developments that supplement the rich diversity of the adopted leisure and recreational activity and other uses which generate strong employment opportunities, whilst protecting the green belt and limiting local impact on the existing infrastructure, are welcomed.”

Council says no to retail development – News – Ilkeston Advertiser http://t.co/cvpHG7S

A MAJOR retail development on the former American Adventure site in Shipley would have a ‘harmful impact’ on nearby town centres, including Ilkeston, the county council has said.

The comment was made in response to Amber Valley Borough Council’s ‘draft development brief’ for Shipley Lakeside – the area of the former theme park earmarked for a major mixed development.

The report, by Derbyshire County Council’s strategic director Ian Stephenson, said: “Such development is likely to have the potential for significant harmful impacts on the vitality and viability of the nearby town centres of Heanor and Ilkeston and, depending on the scale, possibly further afield such as Ripley and Eastwood.”

The county council also revealed its opposition to housing at the site which is in green belt.

County councillor for the area Kevin Parkinson said it would ‘set a precedent’ and create ‘urban sprawl’ by merging Heanor and Ilkeston.

“Any housing development is inappropriate for Shipley Lakeside, given the need to protect Shipley’s green lung and the need to protect free and open access for the community to continue its leisure and recreational uses of the site,” he said.

The brief, together with the county council’s comments, are set to be discussed at an Amber Valley Borough Council planning board meeting on June 20.

BBC News – Private sector sponsored gateway sculpture, of Flying Wheel logo from I&R Morley installed at Heanor -http://bbc.in/joNXln

MORE than 11,000 people visited the county’s annual food and drink fair.

Shipley set to go wild – News – Ilkeston Advertiser http://t.co/Z64fs0G

PLANS to create Derbyshire’s largest nature reserve outside of the Peak District have been warmly welcomed by residents.

Derbyshire Wildlife Trust revealed its vision for the 182-acre site, once part of the former American Adventure theme park in Shipley, at a public meeting in Ilkeston last week.

Amber Valley borough and Derbyshire county councillor for the area Cllr Kevin Parkinson also said there will be increased numbers of visitors to the site.

He said: “I don’t think the reserve will have any greater impact on the area than American Adventure had, but it will be managed better than the theme park was. It will attract different people at different times.”

Have your say on theme park development – News – Ilkeston Advertiser http://t.co/jt3mQ6P

AMBITIOUS plans to create a huge leisure and housing development on the former American Adventure site will come under public scrutiny this week.

A six-week public consultation starts on Tuesday, during which residents can air their concerns, which have so far included worries about the size of the housing section and its encroachment into green land.

Derbyshire county councillor for the area Kevin Parkinson said: “As far as we are concerned at Derbyshire county council, we welcome the opportunity to use the expertise that Waystone has in regeneration – which is why the firm was given exclusivity for development of the site.”

He said that he understands that Waystone is planning to build the housing part of the development first to bring in cash to fund the site’s other planned developments.

“Residents and the parish councils are asking, why would housing naturally go there?” he said.

“It’s never had housing there before and is considered to be greenbelt,

“But at the end of the day it’s important that we have a new development on there, that it’s mixed use, and that it affords free and open access for local people.”

He has urged those living near to the site to make their views known.

“People in Amber Valley borough will be asked their views directly but people in Erewash, particularly in the Cotmanhay area, are people that had jobs previously in the American Adventure site,” he added.

“They can make their views known to me as county councillor for the area.”