DCSIMG

Peveril wins 79 home bid on appeal

Residents of Codnor and Waingroves gather on Holborn View in codnor - the planned entrance to a 79 home development on land known as Codnor Common.

Residents of Codnor and Waingroves gather on Holborn View in codnor - the planned entrance to a 79 home development on land known as Codnor Common.

Campaigners have vowed to take their fight to the Secretary of State after the Planning Inspectorate gave the go ahead to 79 new homes on Codnor Common.

The decision comes months after a heated three day inquiry at Ripley Town Hall in October saw several residents voice concerns about water drainage, volumes of traffic and the impact the build would have on local schools.

And despite the plan by Peveril Homes, for land off Holborn View, Codnor, having twice been turned down by Amber Valley Borough Council, it was inspectorate Stuart Nixon’s view the need for ‘sustainable housing’ in light of the borough’s lack of a five year supply of homes outweighed the negative impacts of Peveril’s bid.

He granted the appeal on the grounds the land is not protected “nor is the site designated as of special landscape or ecological interest, though it is attractive in its undeveloped state.” He said.

But the move has come as a hammer blow to some residents who say that, when coupled with another approved Peveril scheme to build 96 homes to the south of the common, Codnor and Waingroves will soon be effectively joined.

Teaching assistant Lynne Bamford, 44, of Eastfield Road, Codnor, said residents will keep on fighting. She said: “Our next port of call is to complain - complain to Amber Valley Borough Council, complain to the ombudsman, complain to the Secretary of State.”

In a letter to the News, Linda and Kevin Finn of Eastfield Road said they felt let down by Amber Valley Borough Council for not affording the site statutory protection.

Their letter reads: “The failure to build this into the new Local Plan has been seized on by a developer.”

When Peveril homes was asked how it intended to work with the community from here on in light of objections raised to the scheme - it declined to comment.

 

Comments

 
 

Back to the top of the page