Campaigner urges Secretary of State to call-in massive controversial housing scheme near Worksop for final decision

Clowne Garden Village Action Group Chairperson Dom Webb and fellow campaigners have argued the district council needs to further review and update draft agreements for the development for 1,800 homes after raising a number of fresh concerns including claims of outdated highways information, more flooding fears and the scheme’s current viability.

The group – which is opposed to the development – is calling for the Secretary of State to decide under a judicial review whether the scheme goes ahead by examining its current viability and its S106 infrastructure financial contributions including a plan to defer SEND funding, as well as fresh complaints that there is a need for sequential flood risk testing, and that its highways data is outdated, and it offers weak affordable housing provision.

Action group Chairperson Dom Webb said: “New housing is vital to our community, but it must be delivered lawfully and sustainably.

“The current plans to build on land that has consistently flooded for over sixty years risk failing residents, especially vulnerable groups, and will result in undeliverable infrastructure.

“We call on the council to act swiftly to avoid costly litigation.”

Bolsover District Council’s planning committee previously approved Waystone Ltd’s outline planning application at a meeting in September, last year, subject to financial infrastructure contributions for the scheme’s plans for 1,800 new homes with 24 hectares of greenfield land for employment, community and commercial development near Clowne and Barlborough.

And following a further meeting on May 14 the committee voted by a majority to approve a draft agreement of the developer’s Section 106 financial contributions worth millions of pounds towards infrastructure prior to an agreement and acceptance that changes to the National Planning Policy Framework and the validity of an ageing viability appraisal will not affect planning permission.

The action group has argued the council’s August 2024 Viability Report became invalid from May 31 and that it fails to account for three to five per cent rises in construction costs, stagnant housing sales, and declining commercial land values and that a £302,986 residual land value shortfall endangers £25.4m in S106 infrastructure obligations including affordable housing.

It also claims plans to defer £1.46m of funding – which will be dependent upon a viability review – for youngsters with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities may disproportionately harm children with disabilities and potentially violate the Equality Act 2010.

Planning committee member, Cllr Rob Hiney-Saunders, argued at the committee meeting the council should be looking at the scheme’s financial viability again but the council’s development manager Chris Whitmore said the council’s financial advisor has stated the findings in the council’s report are robust and if an S106 agreement can be reached by around the end of May with a review mechanism the council’s assessment can still be relied upon.

Cllr Hiney-Saunders, who oversees the Clowne East ward, also suggested there was a lower priority being given towards SEND S106 contributions but a council officer stated that an equality review has been carried out including the impact on SEND and due regard was taken on this issue with an assessment fulfilling the council’s legal duty.

Mr Webb also claims that despite a high surface water flood risk with 3.3per cent annual probability, according to the Lead Local Flood Authority after Storm Babet, no sequential flood test has been conducted which he claims breaches the 2024 NPPF.

He also believes that by relying on 2017 traffic surveys, the scheme’s highways data is outdated and threatens safety because he believes the transport assessment underestimates traffic by up to 10.83per cent by 2032 or 30.20per cent by 2049 and that concerns from Active Travel England and Derbyshire County Council’s highways authority have been inadequately addressed.

Finally, the action group has argued the scheme involves weak affordable housing provisions because the S106 infrastructure agreement’s 10per cent affordable housing commitment includes a three-month marketing period, risking reliance on commuted sums that may not deliver equivalent housing which he claims also contradicts NPPF standards.

However, Mr Whitmore has stated the council has addressed changes to the NPPF and its planning committee was updated on the validity of the viability in May and that the council has met its duties under the environmental impact assessment regulations.

The Secretary of State originally decided in February not to call in the planning application for further consideration and to leave its determination with the district council, and that officers recommended draft details concerning the developer’s financial contributions towards the infrastructure be approved allowing for any minor amendments to finally confirm the overall planning permission.

The council has also stressed that changes in a revised NPPF in December, 2024, concerning decision-making and development management are not considered to materially impact on the decision of the planning committee.

And the council’s viability expert has also advised that findings from the August 2, 2024, viability assessment for the scheme can still be relied upon if an agreed position is reached on the S106 obligations by the end of May, 2025, or soon afterwards.

In addition, Derbyshire County Council’s highways authority and Highways England raised no objections to the scheme, and the county council’s flood team, the Environment Agency, the Coal Authority, Derbyshire Wildlife Trust and Yorkshire Water also raised no objections.

The district council has already formally noted the validity of the viability appraisal work and changes to the NPPF do not materially impact on the resolution to grant planning permission and it approved a decision relating to the environmental effects that after an S106 agreement is reached the public will be informed of the scheme’s granted planning permission.

And developer Waystone has claimed there is support for the scheme in terms of the potential for economic growth, facilities and jobs and that it will also support the need for housing and bring highway improvements.

The scheme at a site which includes part of Clowne village centre off Hickinwood Lane, also features plans for green infrastructure, educational and recreational uses, a retirement village, a neighbourhood centre, a hotel, restaurant, health and care provision, leisure uses, and demolition work at Station Road Industrial Estate.

Proposed S106 contributions include: The delivery of a new primary school by the applicant or a full contribution of £9,500,000 to Derbyshire Council’s education authority for the delivery of a new primary school, and also a Secondary School Contribution of £8,258,879; A new Treble Bob roundabout scheme; An M1 Junction 30 scheme and a travel plan; And that ten per cent of the new properties will be affordable housing,

Other contributions include a £1,800,000 contribution towards the NHS Integrated Care Board to improve health care facilities, a deferred £1,463,597 towards helping young people with SEND depending on the scheme’s viability, and a deferred payment of £126,840 towards local library stocks and capacity also depending on viability.

Many hundreds of residents and campaigners have raised objections to the housing scheme, north of Clowne, amid fears it will lead to overcrowding, place a strain on highways, health services and education, create drainage and flooding problems and affect the countryside and wildlife with the loss of some Green Belt land.

During the planning process, a consultation attracted at least 1,400 comments and the Clowne Garden Village Action Group’s membership grew to over 2,000 people sharing opposition to the scheme and its online and paper petitions attracted over 6,000 signatures from residents in Clowne and Barlborough opposed to the plans.

Mr Webb has written to the Secretary of State, Angela Rayner, in light of the action group’s latest concerns urging that Bolsover District Council be directed not to issue a decision of notice on the Clowne Garden Village planning application and that the matter should be called-in for the Secretary of State to determine and to ensure that lawful process has been followed.

Bolsover District Council chose not to comment on the action group’s latest complaints after granting outline planning permission for the scheme in September, last year, and agreeing in May to approve a draft agreement of the Section 106 contributions prior to its agreement and acceptance that changes to the NPPF and the validity of a viability appraisal will not affect planning permission.

It also noted the validity of the viability appraisal work and changes to the NPPF do not materially impact on the planning permission and it approved a decision relating to the environmental effects that after an S106 agreement is reached the public will be informed of the scheme’s granted planning permission.