160 houses at Firs Works, Nether Heage, Belper

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Amber Valley Planning Committee on 1 Dec 2025.

AVA/2023/0624Approved

No officer report was published for this decision; this summary is from the committee minutes.

Ward councillors' concerns

Ward councillors raised the loss of views of a listed windmill, a lack of local shops and transport, and which primary school the section 106 agreement would benefit.

“Councillor Amina Burslem (ward councillor) raised a number of concerns about the reserved matters of the application including the quality life of the new residents and neighbouring villages. It was noted that the houses would break up the view of the grade 2 listed Heage Windmill. There were also lack of amenities including public transport currently in Nether Heage and no café, meeting places or shops had been proposed.”

“Councillor Paul Lobley (ward councillor) stated that we welcomed the provision for affordable homes in the development but disagreed with Derbyshire County Council’s comments on the application. He was disappointed that there would be no provision for footpaths and that it would be Heage Primary School rather than Ambergate Primary School which would benefit from the section 106 agreement which was closer to the development.”

Minutes

Objectors' concerns

Objectors raised flooding and drainage, dangerous access on a narrow junction with no footpaths, and the safety of construction traffic.

“[the objector] (objector) raised concerns about flooding and drainage. She stated that those who currently lived on Bentfield Road were suffering from drainage and flooding problems and that the infrastructure would not cope with an additional 160 houses. She also asked how the balancing pond would be maintained and managed long term.”

“[the objector] (objector) lived on Hawkins Drive close to the proposal. She raised concerns about the increase in traffic flow at the Spanker junction, down to the proposed new road and onto the A610. She stated that it was very steep and narrow with only access for 1 vehicle at a time and had no footpaths. She believed that there was poor adherence to the 30 mile per hour speed limit and that residents including children used this route to access public transport.”

Minutes

The agent's response

The agent said the scheme had been amended to address consultee concerns, leaving no outstanding objections, and that a section 106 agreement would fund open space, bus stops and education.

Vote and decision

The motion to approve the reserved matters, subject to conditions, was carried.

“Debate Councillor Emmas-Williams proposed the following motion, which was seconded by Councillor Sherman: That the application be approved, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 of the officer’s report. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was therefore: RESOLVED:”

Minutes

Decision

The committee resolved to approve the application, subject to the conditions in the officer's report appendix.

“That the application be approved, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 of the officer’s report.”

Minutes

Sources

  • Amber Valley Planning Committee minutes, 1 December 2025
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Amber Valley's committee minutes. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Date
Monday 1 December 2025
Committee decided
Approved
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)

This committee's year

6 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →