'Affordable homes needed over protection of land owned by those who did very well for themselves'

The public inquiry into plans for dozens of homes off Chesterfield Road, Alfreton has started

A developer has told an inquiry that affordable housing for families should be prioritised over the protection of Derbyshire land owned by “those who did very well for themselves in former centuries”. The public inquiry into plans from Gladman for 185 houses off Chesterfield Road on the northern boundary of Alfreton opened at The Post Mill Centre in South Normanton today (Tuesday, October 8).

This followed rejection of the plans by Amber Valley Borough Council officers in March, this year, after insufficient information to provide assurance on key concerns was provided and Gladman rejected an extension of time – following two approved extensions by the council. Richard Kimblin, KC representing Gladman, told the inquiry, overseen by Government planning inspector William Cooper that the 185 home plans had been reduced to 177 – eight fewer homes – in order to provide more biodiversity space.

Mr Kimblin said Gladman would consider the harm to the historic Alfreton Hall, Alfreton Park, St Martin’s Church and the Alfreton Conservation area but will then “turn our minds from what remains from those who did very well for themselves in former centuries to the needs of the current population and current social and economic circumstances”. He said there was “no doubt” the project would harm heritage sites surrounding the proposed plot.

Mr Kimblin said: “The appeal proposal is a very good one, in the right place, to meet real needs for real people who are themselves in need of decent homes. It is, so I understand, the Secretary of State’s ambition to address the national housing crisis by building 1.5 million homes over the next five years.

“We are going to be engaged in a case where there is an economic need for development to address the effects of economic decline and a social need to provide decent homes which are affordable. There is both a professional and moral obligation to deliver affordable and social housing and to fix the foundation of our housing system.”

Mr Kimblin said there was a “significant” affordable housing need in Alfreton with delivery of new homes falling “well short of that need”, detailing “the same picture emerges across the borough and at a scale which can only prompt serious concern”. He said the impact of this was “long-standing and cumulative”, affecting “the poorest and the vulnerable” and that the 177-home plans would “make a major contribution to meet the current identified need”.

Mr Kimblin said much development had already been approved over the years in the land around Alfreton Hall, including a leisure centre, medical centre, day centre, cricket club, council offices and a school. Of the original 185 homes planned for the site, 55 would be classed as affordable housing, with £2.4 million in improvements owed for improvements to schools, healthcare facilities and library facilities to offset the impact of the scheme.

Ned Westaway, legal counsel for Amber Valley Borough Council, also represented the council in its successful defence of the 2022 appeal against plans for a 185-acres solar farm in the adjacent fields towards Oakerthorpe. He told the inquiry that the developers had “underestimated” the impact of the scheme on the surrounding landscape and heritage assets, which had been supported by the inspector in the 2022 solar farm appeal.

Mr Westaway said the council “disputes” there is a need for housing in Alfreton, with the authority showing it has 8.71 years worth of housing land – when the requirement is five years – with 9,036 homes planned to be built in the borough up to 2040. He said this site was put forward for inclusion in the council’s upcoming new Local Plan, but was not accepted, while plans for 128 homes in Alfreton are due to be earmarked and sufficient to meet local need.

The 177-home plans risked “undermining” the Local Plan, he said. Mr Westaway said: “We need to build houses but we need to build in the right places.

“The national need for housing does not mean that every site is suitable for development.” He said the proposed plans would “fracture” the surrounding landscape and isolate the historic buildings, along with “removing the sense of tranquillity” by “urbanising” the area.

Mr Westaway claimed the landowner had “vandalised” a number of trees in the process of promoting the site for development and needed to be held accountable for such action. Kate Jones, an Alfreton resident for 32 years, said more than 440 people had signed a petition opposing the plans, and said many people had shared their “utter sense of grief”, at the thought that they could look at the beloved countryside around the town and repeat “all this used to be fields”.

She said: “The serenity of this area cannot survive this inevitable disruption.” Richard Marsden, speaking on behalf of the Alfreton and District Footpaths Society, said the plot was “the last open landscape surrounding Alfreton, with all other land earmarked or already built on”.

He said footpaths through the countryside provided a vital benefit for physical and mental health, particularly during the pandemic, and had historic links stretching back centuries. Mr Marsden said: “People would be deterred from using this. Urban character attracts litter and old shopping trolleys and people gathering on corners, ceasing to be a pleasant rural walk.

“Urban footpaths are blighted and are not as enjoyable. People don’t go for an organised ramble on routes through developed housing estates.”

Peter Milner, on behalf of Alfreton Town Council, said the “significance” of the surrounding landscape was “amplified and verified” in the solar farm appeal and claimed “heritage assets are again under threat”. Caz Moon, a local resident, said: “Developers do not get it and I doubt really get how we feel.

“It is a big slap in the face for developers to advertise on their sites the landscape views which they have stolen from residents who have cherished them for generations. This would be a once green and pleasant vista replaced by modern day blobs.”

Jamie Selby, a member of the 3,000-strong Save Alfreton Countryside campaign group, said approaching 500 people had filed objection letters to the scheme, and opposed a future where all sides of Alfreton were either “merged with neighbouring villages or industrialised”. He said: “This development is not welcomed nor is it needed.”

Karen Bradley, also from Save Alfreton Countryside, said there was a “palpable” level of history in the area stretching back to mediaeval times and that this had been “wildly understated”. Ryan Morgan, on behalf of CPRE Derbyshire, a countryside charity, advocated for brownfield sites being used before green field plots and that the scheme would cause “irreversible damage” to the landscape which was “invaluable to the people who use it and need it”.

He said: “It feels distasteful that this appeal has been made against the will of local people.” Alfreton resident Clare Price-Dowd, who has worked in the NHS for 40 years, said the need for housing “was not disputed” but that derelict buildings and brownfield land should be exhausted first.

She claimed the scheme would result in contributions worth £80.44 per resident but health investment would only provide the equivalent of a GP for a year or a mid-level dentist for a year, or flu jabs for one season for half of Alfreton’s residents. Ms Price-Dowd said: “The infrastructure cannot sustain what we are seeing proposed.

“The poorest in this community will be the most disadvantaged. We are groaning under the lack of NHS services and dental services.

“The bus services have been cut, the train services, we have empty shops all down the high street and woefully inadequate healthcare facilities in Alfreton.” The inquiry continues and concludes on October 18.

We send out the biggest stories in an email every day. Sign up for the main Derbyshire Live newsletter here.