Residents plead for Government inspector to reject plan to build hundreds of homes above Derbyshire town

On Tuesday (March 11) Matlock Town Hall played host to the first day of a Government inspector-led public inquiry into rejected plans from William Davis Homes for 423 houses on the Matlock Wolds, off Gritstone Road, Sandy Lane and Pinewood Road.

The development, rejected a year ago by Derbyshire Dales District Council, is not being defended by the authority on the advice of independent experts who advised their grounds for refusal were indefensible.

This has left the sole defence to the plans it refused becoming the responsibility of the Wolds Action Group and more than a dozen residents and councillors.

Julie Atkin, on behalf of the group, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service today that this was “disappointing” and “pulled the rug from under us”.

They claim flood water collection ponds on the site are so large – the size of Olympic swimming pools – could more accurately be called “dams” or “reservoirs” and carry a real risk of “devastation” should they breach or overtop.

The developer maintains their flood and drainage plans are sufficient and have not led to opposition from experts at Derbyshire County Council, specifying that the risk the flood water ponds pose is “unfounded”.

Opening the inquiry, Government inspector Joanna Gilbert specified that she would be tasked with considering 423 homes on the site, with 345 rejected in “outline” form (requiring more detailed plans later) and 78 rejected in full.

The district council had written in a report in January that the inquiry focused on plans for 345 homes.

Gwion Lewis KC, on behalf of William Davis, said the Wolds site was the fourth largest in the district council’s own Local Plan and that it represents a major part of making that plan sound.

He said the council had a housing land supply of 1.36 years which was “one of the lowest in England”.

Tom Cosgrove KC, on behalf of the council, said the authority’s role in the inquiry would be “limited” and would not involve calling witnesses or proposing evidence.

The one remaining point of contention would be the financial viability of the development and its ability to provide contributions for education, roads, health, open space improvements and for affordable housing.

Roger Yarwood, on behalf of the action group (the Rule 6 party), said the district council’s late “capitulation” had left it unable to call witnesses on all the areas it felt were necessary, saying “the local planning authority does not wish the Rule 6 party to succeed”.

Jenny Fellows, a local resident, said local vehicle movements in the morning were forecast to increase by 269 per cent and by 649 per cent in the evening as a result of the scheme.

Keep on track with all of the important news from Derby with our free newsletter. Sign up today

This would also include 50 to 90 HGV movements per day for nine years during construction.

She feared the impact on schoolchildren from the nearby Highfields secondary school, saying their safety had simply not been assessed.

Sharon Briddon, who lives close to the site, said an ecological assessment of the site found one frog and one group of starlings, which she said was clearly inaccurate.

She said the “unviable” development would lead to increased risk of flooding and not to “gamble with the lives of future residents”.

Karen Bradley, from the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said the project would see “58 acres of green sponge removed”, saying that “concreting over” the land would lead to much more water running towards the River Derwent and an “unacceptable” flood risk.

Roger Bilton, who has lived in the town for 25 years, said brownfield sites around Matlock should be built on – such as Cawdor and Halldale quarries – instead of the “pristine, virgin greenfield” Wolds.

He said just 18 per cent of homes for sale in the town were priced at under £200,000, saying the area badly needed cheaper social housing.

The developer is currently proposing to provide zero affordable housing citing viability issues.

Mr Bilton said the community had already suffered years of construction from four surrounding developments and now faced “nine more years of building hell”.

Christine Martin, who has lived in Gritstone Road since 1991, said the scheme represented an “unacceptable intrusion” into the surrounding landscape, which was “riddled” with springs which had once fed the town’s 19 hydrotherapy facilities.

She said: “This will affect every generation coming forward and will create flooding on and off the site.”

Heather Clifton-Smith, who has lived in Bentley Close for 21 years, said Sandy Lane was dubbed “13 springs” by locals due to the number of watercourses running through the site.

Ms Clifton-Smith said: “How can this be proposed when the flooding is so bad now? It will pose a threat to all the residents and their properties.”

Cllr Steve Wain, a district councillor and Matlock flood warden, said the developer had been given six years to design an effective drainage system and had “failed”.

He said the proposed “dams” would lead to “uncontrolled overtopping” of the “Olympic pool sized attenuation ponds” and that no “breach” assessment had been carried out.

David Ball, a local resident who provided detailed research of the area’s historic and largely uncharted drainage network, claimed: “There is nothing the applicant has proposed that will not increase flood risk elsewhere.”

He claimed the proposed ponds would fill within two hours in heavy rainfall and would only be viable for five years.

Dr Adam Aitken, a lecturer at the University of Salford, said research into Matlock’s flood resilience he carried out found an “exasperated” community that faced a “tipping point” in being able to cope with future incidents.

The inquiry is due to run for five days and conclude on Tuesday, March 18 with a decision to be issued in the next few months.