The Planning Inspectorate - South Derbyshire District Council

The Planning Inspectorate
Room 406 / Kite Wing Direct Line 0117-372 8948
Temple Quay House Switchboard 0117-372 8000
2 The Square Fax No 0117-372 6241
Temple Quay GTN 1371-8948
Bristol BS1 6PN
e-mail: janet.foster@pins.gsi.gov.uk
http://www.planning-inspectorate.gov.uk
The Chief Executive
South Derbyshire District Council
Civic Offices
Civic Way
Swadlincote
Derbyshire
DE11 0AH
Your Ref:
Our Ref: DP 451
Date: 22 November 2004
Dear Sir
PUBLIC LOCAL INQUIRY INTO OBJECTIONS TO THE SOUTH DERBYSHIRE
LOCAL PLAN REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT
As you will be aware, Mr Chris West LLB MCIArb MIMgt FCIS Solicitor was
appointed by the First Secretary of State to hold a Public Local Inquiry into duly
made and maintained objections to the South Derbyshire Local Plan Revised
Deposit Draft (referred to as the ‘Plan’ in this letter).
Regretfully, owing the onset of ill-health following the formal closure of the inquiry,
Mr West was unable to complete his report into the objections heard at the inquiry
and those submitted in writing. In order to facilitate progress with the remainder of
the report and to expedite its completion, I was appointed as Joint Inspector.
The report has now been completed and is enclosed with this letter. It combines the
work of Mr West and myself. The work has utilised Mr West’s notes of the
proceedings, the evidence and submissions presented at the inquiry, and the
written objections and responses thereto. Every effort has been taken to secure
consistency of approach and coherence within the report, and I hope you will find it
satisfactory in that respect.
The inquiry was held between 3 June 2003 and 13 February 2004 and sat for a
total of 32 days. Before, during, and after the inquiry, a series of accompanied and
unaccompanied sites visits to all the sites that were the subject of objections were
made.
This letter covers an outline of the procedural background to the preparation of the
Plan and Inquiry and highlights the main issues arising from the objections.
The report follows the chapter order of the Revised Deposit Draft Plan. Objections
are listed against specific policies or section of the Plan. The summaries of
objections are largely based on the summaries provided by the Council, but in some
instances – the Housing chapter is a case in point - the order has been changed
with a view to imparting a greater degree of clarity and coherence into the

structure of the report. Recommendations comprise modifications that should or
should not be made to the Plan, namely the Revised Deposit Draft of January 2003.
THE PLAN
The First Deposit Draft of the Plan was placed on deposit by the Council for public
inspection and consultation between 20 February 2002 and 3 April 2002. 1,221
objections were received, together with 245 supporting statements. Subsequently,
98 objections were withdrawn and a further 114 were conditionally withdrawn.
Following consideration of the representations, the Revised Deposit version of the
Plan was placed on deposit for consultation between 3 January 2003 and 14
February 2003. 228 objections and 58 supporting statements were received. Two
of these objections were withdrawn and two more were conditionally withdrawn.
Derbyshire County Council issued a Statement of General Conformity between the
Plan and the adopted Structure Plan on 22 May 2002.
Four further changes to the Plan were agreed between the Council and individual
objectors during the course of the Inquiry. Recommendations, where appropriate,
whether the Plan should be modified in accordance with these changes, are
included in the report. In the absence of any formal procedure for such changes, it
would be prudent for the Council to advertise any modifications arising from them
prior to the adoption of the Plan.
THE OBJECTIONS
In the consideration of all objections, regard has been had to submissions made by
the objectors and the Council and to all other material considerations, including
Planning Policy Guidance (PPGs) and Circulars where appropriate. Regard has also
been had to those representations in support of the Plan. Regard has not been had
to any changes in local planning circumstances or national policy since closing the
Inquiry as representations have not been received thereon. For example, the report
includes a number of references to PPG7, rather than the recently published PPS7.
The Council will need to take any such changes into account in their consideration
of my recommendations.
THE MAIN ISSUES
Although the Plan addresses a wide range of topics, the main policy issues in the
report concern the provision and distribution of housing land, together with the
development strategy and classification of individual settlements, and the provision
and distribution of employment land. Cutting across these issues is the question of
the sites of the former power stations at Willington and Drakelow.
Housing
I find the housing figures and assumptions that underpin them to be generally
sound, as I do the broad strategy of the Plan, albeit I have reservations about the
mechanics of the methodology used to classify individual settlements, and have
recommended that a reassessment be carried out. And, with one exception, I
support the main housing allocations proposed in the Plan and reject the criticisms
regarding deliverability that have been levelled at some of them. I do, however,
have reservations about two allocations listed under Policy H2; these concerns are
reflected in my recommendation.
2

The one proposed housing site I am unable to support is the former Willington
Power Station, the subject of Policy H5, which I have recommended be deleted
from the Plan. I have not done so lightly, not least because the site represents a
substantial tract of previously developed land in an area where such land is
relatively scarce. However, I take the view that the particular circumstances
involved are such that the advantages of utilising this brownfield site are
outweighed by site specific disadvantages.
The main consequence of my recommendation regarding Policy H5 is that this
creates a shortfall in the housing numbers. I have had regard to this in my
assessment of the numerous other sites promoted by objectors, including those
who expressly claim that certain ones ought to be preferred to Willington. However
rather than recommend that certain of these sites be specifically allocated, I have
identified a number of those I consider most suitable for further evaluation by the
Council.
My other concern regarding housing relates to Policy H10, which is directed at
affordable housing. Although I am broadly supportive of the policy and see a place
for it in the Plan, I have serious reservations about the Housing Markets and Needs
Study that informed the policy. I recommend that the Study be reconsidered.
Employment Land
My main finding under this heading is that because of significant uncertainties
attached to land that was formerly part of Drakelow Power Station, the land without
planning permission should be deleted from the employment sites listed under
Policy EMP1. I do, however, agree that the Plan should contain a reference to the
longer term potential of the site in this respect and I recommend accordingly.
As a direct consequence of the above, I conclude that Policy EMP1 does not make
adequate provision for the supply of employment land in the Swadlincote Sub-Area
and recommend that further land be identified with a view to allocating it
accordingly. In this respect, I also recommend that consideration be given to the
reinstatement in the Plan of the land south of Cadley Hill Industrial Estate,
Swadlincote that was allocated as an employment site in the First Deposit Draft.
Because of the linkage between Policy H5 and the proposed employment site at the
former Willington Power Station, I recommend that the latter also be deleted from
the Plan. Despite that, I conclude that Policy EMP1 makes adequate provision for
the supply of employment land in the Derby Sub-Area, in which case I see no need
for any further allocations to be made there, including land at Burnaston Cross
which was the subject of some controversy during the Inquiry.
IN CONCLUSION
Attention is drawn to the fact that my recommended modifications to policies in the
Plan may also necessitate consequential modifications to supporting text and/or the
Proposals Map. Such modifications are not necessarily noted in the report.
I understand that a complete set of documents submitted in connection with the
Inquiry is held in the Council’s Planning Department and should be kept available
for inspection there by prior arrangement.
3

Finally, I express my thanks for the assistance and co-operation received
throughout the Inquiry from all those involved in the proceedings. The Programme
Officer, Peter Savage, provided invaluable assistance prior to, during, and after the
Inquiry; his calm support and unstinting hard work deserve especial praise. I would
also like to thank the Council for their forbearance in the light of the difficulties that
have arisen.
Assistance at the Housing Round Table session of the Inquiry was provided by
Nicholas Matthews MTCP MRTPI, one of the Planning Inspectorate’s Higher Planning
Officers. Mr Matthews also helped during the related preparation of the Housing
chapter of the Report. I express my gratitude for his help and assistance, but
should emphasise that the Report remains entirely the work of Mr West and myself.
A copy of this letter has been sent for information to the Government Office for the
East of England and to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
Yours faithfully
D H Brier BA MA MRTPI
Joint Inspector
Also on behalf of
C J West
Joint Inspector
cc
GO-EM
ODPM(c), Eland House, Bressenden Place, London, SW1 5DU
4