NEDDC Local Plan Issues and Options Consultation on the Strategic Approach to the Location of Development and Refined Sites (March 2026)

This representation is submitted on behalf of Mr Keeley, owner of *redacted*. We write to OBJECT to the inclusion of the above site ‘Land A at Cherry Tree Farm, Walton (45043)’ in the Refined Schedule of Sites for the North East Derbyshire Local Plan. Representations have also been submitted separately in relation to site 45042 ‘Redundant Nursery Land at Cherry Tree Farm, Walton’. This site is reliant on that site for access, and so is relevant for the purpose of consideration.

Land Availability Assessment

The Land Availability Assessment (LAA), which is the evidence document which has informed the Refined Schedule of Sites put forward for consultation has identified this site as having a Suitability RAG rating of Amber, and an overall conclusion of Red. Achievability and availability were given a RAG rating of Green.

The LAA Methodology (March 2026) identifies that “red RAG rating for any category will result in an overall red LAA conclusion, which means the site is unsuitable. Site promoters of any red sites will be informed and given the opportunity to present mitigation measures and solutions after the automated assessment”.

It goes on to state that “All sites that score amber or green are subsequently subject to a more detailed assessment by specialist officers on potential constraints which are applicable to the site but could not necessarily be assessed automatically – these include matters of highways, conservation and archaeology, ecology, landscape, etc.”

There is some ambiguity over why this site has been given an overall conclusion of Red, however we consider this assessment to be correct, and as such strongly recommend that it should be removed it its entirety.

Green Belt

The site is situated in the Green Belt. We acknowledge that a Green Belt Review is ongoing, which will identify the extent to which the site meets Green Belt purposes, and specifically purposes a, b and d, which are relevant to consideration of whether the land is Grey Belt. We set out our thoughts on these matters below.

Purpose A of the Green Belt is to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas. Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) sets out that an area contributes strongly to this purpose where a site is free of existing development and lacks any physical feature(s) in reasonable proximity that could restrict and contain development. Sites are also likely to be adjacent or near to a large built-up area and if developed result in an incongruous pattern of development.

This site is situated on the edge of the Green Belt and it is clear that Matlock Road provides a legible physical feature which defines this edge. It is acknowledged that ribbon development exists on the south side of Matlock Road with the current Green Belt, however this comprises detached properties in large plots which are significantly set back from the road. There is significant tree planting along Matlock Road and with the exception of boundary walls and entrances, these properties are not significantly visible from Matlock Road.

There is no physical feature behind the proposed site which could contain the Green Belt should this site, or wider area, be removed from the designation. Paragraph 149 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out that when defining Green Belt, plans should define boundaries clearly, using physical features that are readily recognisable and likely to be permanent.

Removing this site would also result in an incongruous pattern of development. To deliver between 8 and 10 houses on this site would not follow the prevailing character or density of development along the south side of Matlock Road and would fundamentally result in development which was not in keeping with the local area.

On this basis we conclude, in accordance with guidance in the PPG, that this site contributes strongly to purpose (a) of the Green Belt, to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas. On this basis we do not consider this site to be Grey Belt Land.

Purpose B of the Green Belt is to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another. PPG identifies that to strongly contribute to this purpose a site should form a substantial gap between towns and result in the loss of visual separation. This site sits between Walton and Wingerworth and provides a substantial gap between them. Whilst visual separation is limited by the presence of woodland to the south, this nevertheless does not stop this site contributing to this purpose, and we suggest this contribution is moderate.

Purpose d relates to the preservation of setting and special character of historic towns. In this instance the site does not contribute to this purpose.

On this basis we conclude, in accordance with guidance in the PPG, that this site contributes strongly to purpose (a) of the Green Belt, to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas. Accordingly, we conclude that the site does not meet the definition of Grey Belt.

Paragraph 142 of the NPPF is clear that the Government attached great importance to Green Belts and in Paragraph 145 that these should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidence and justified through the preparation or updating of plans.

The benefits of removing this site out of the Green Belt, to deliver between 8 and 10 houses, is negligible in the context of the overall housing need in the District and we do not consider that exceptional circumstances are justified for the release of this site. Development here would create incongruous development, which would not be in keeping with the prevailing character of the area and the revised Green Belt boundary would not be legible and well defined by existing features.

On Green Belt policy alone we strongly recommend that this site should be removed from further consideration as a potential allocation. In summary, the harm created would significantly outweigh any marginal benefits towards meeting housing needs.

Highways

There is no direct highway access to this site, and development would be reliant on utilising site 45042 ‘Redundant Nursery Land at Cherry Tree Farm, Walton’. There are two existing accesses to this site, a single width track to the east of the site and a larger double width track to the west.

The wider access to the west is located within the 40mph zone of Matlock Road and almost on the brow of the hill. When utilising this entrance it is difficult to see any distance in either direction and taking account of the speed of the road we consider there to be specific safety issues with intensification of this access. We also note that highway comments in the LAA identified that “The topography presents a highway problem within the highway and within the site”.

The narrower access to the east is located within the 30mph zone and would need widening to achieve appropriate access. This access appears to serve Cherry Tree Farm, a listed building. We consider that there may be adverse impacts on the setting of the listed building through the upgrading of this entrance to serve this site.
In addition to highway safety and heritage matters, placing an access to a new residential development so close to the boundary of an existing residential property (Ashcroft) is likely to lead to significant amenity concerns.

Highway comments in the LAA identifies that “While there are several footpaths in the surrounding area, none are immediately adjacent to the site. Pavements are located on the opposite side of the road, so a controlled crossing could be considered to improve pedestrian safety and support more sustainable travel options”. We consider that on a scheme of this number of dwellings a controlled crossing is unlikely to be viable and suggest therefore that the safety of users crossing the road is a strong concern.

There is clearly no immediately suitable highway access to this site and we suggest that there is significant concerns that one could be provided.

Heritage

North of the site is the Grade II listed Cherry Tree Farmhouse. Whilst the listed building will not be directly affected by the development proposals on this site, it clearly provides the wider setting of the farmhouse and provides understanding of the identity of the listed building as a farmhouse.

An Ordnance Survey Map from 1883, shows the farmhouse sitting alone in a rural landscape. Whilst clearly the surrounding area has changed significantly and most of the appreciation of the setting is removed, this site and land to the north, provides the last links with the historical significance of the farmhouse.

Development of this site will have indirect impacts to the listed building through a change to its setting. Development will remove any of its association with a wider farmland setting, and accordingly there will be harm from development on the setting of a designated heritage asset. Paragraph 212 of the NPPF states that great weight should be given to an asset’s conservation and harm to the setting of the listed building weighs significantly against the allocation of this site.

Landscape

It is clear that Matlock Road provides a defined edge to Walton. Development on the south side of Matlock Road at the scale proposed, would be out of kilter with the surrounding development. The character of the southern side of Matlock Road is defined by detached properties in large plots, set back from the road.

Whilst there is some screening of the site, it is clear that the development would be visible from along both Matlock Road and from users of the Golf Course to the rear. There is a public footpath which runs through the golf course from which views of the development will be readily available. This adds to the sense that development here will be incongruous and out of character.

Development on this site would not continue the ribbon development which is currently present and would create an awkward and uncomfortable relationship with properties to the north, which are set back within their plots and close to the boundary of the site. Development of this site in isolation would be significantly out of character and harmful to the landscape character of the area.

Interconnectivity with site 45042 ‘Redundant Nursery Land at Cherry Tree Farm, Walton’

Notwithstanding concerns about the suitability of this site on its own, particularly in respect of landscape, delivery is wholly dependent on access being secured through site 45042 ‘Redundant Nursery Land at Cherry Tree Farm, Walton’. With a suitability rating of ‘red’ in the LAA and with heritage, highways and landscape issues as set out in our separate representations, site 45042 is not suitable for development. As such this site is not deliverable as it is not possible to secure access. Furthermore, delivery of the two sites together to secure access for this land will cumulatively have a far greater impact than each site in isolation.

Sewage and surface flooding

The proposed development site is not served by a public sewage system. Properties along the south side of Matlock Road, including Cherry Tree Farm, do not have the benefit of being connected to a mains sewerage system and are served by septic tank systems which have operated satisfactorily over time. There is no main sewer in the road and as such drainage would be reliant on septic tanks or private treatments plants, adding to the complexity of development.

Conclusion

In the first instance this site should not have been taken forward due to its rating in the LAA. We fully support the conclusion in this assessment that the site has an overall conclusion of ‘red’ and should be removed from any further consideration in accordance with the published LAA methodology.

In respect of Green Belt policy, this site should not be classed as Grey Belt. In accordance with the sequential approach to the release of sites, this site is within the lowest classification of priority. The development of 8-10 houses must also be weighed against the release of the Green Belt. Development here would create incongruous development, which would not been in keeping with the prevailing character of the area and the revised Green Belt boundary would not be legible and well defined by existing features. As such the harm from the Green Belt release would not be outweighed by the benefits of housing delivery.

Fundamentally, the benefits of allocating this site for development are significantly outweighed by the harm that would be created, both in respect of Green Belt and through wider considerations such as landscape, heritage and highways. We reasonably assume these factors are why the site was attributed a red rating by the LPA and on this basis the site should progress no further. We OBJECT to the site being a potential allocation and respectfully request that it be removed from the Local Plan process going forward.

This representation is submitted on behalf of Mr Keeley, owner of *redacted*. We write to OBJECT to the inclusion of the above site ‘Redundant Nursery Land at Cherry Tree Farm, Walton’ (45042) in the Refined Schedule of Sites for the North East Derbyshire Local Plan. Representations have also been submitted separately in relation to site 45044 ‘Land A at Cherry Tree Farm, Walton’. That land is reliant on this site for access, and so is relevant for the purpose of consideration.

Land Availability Assessment

The Land Availability Assessment (LAA), which is the evidence document which has informed the Refined Schedule of Sites put forward for consultation has identified this site as having a Suitability RAG rating of Red, and an overall conclusion of Red. Achievability and availability were given a RAG rating of Green.

The LAA Methodology (March 2026) identifies that “red RAG rating for any category will result in an overall red LAA conclusion, which means the site is unsuitable. Site promoters of any red sites will be informed and given the opportunity to present mitigation measures and solutions after the automated assessment”.

It goes on to state that “All sites that score amber or green are subsequently subject to a more detailed assessment by specialist officers on potential constraints which are applicable to the site but could not necessarily be assessed automatically – these include matters of highways, conservation and archaeology, ecology, landscape, etc.”

As this site received a suitability rating of red and an overall conclusion of red it is unclear why this site has progressed further and why the site remains in the Refined Schedule of Sites document. We agree with the conclusions of Local Planning Authority (LPA) in respect of this site in terms of suitability and strongly recommend that it should be removed it its entirety, in accordance with the methodology set out within the LAA.

Green Belt

The site is situated in the Green Belt. We acknowledge that a Green Belt Review is ongoing, which will identify the extent to which the site meets Green Belt purposes, and specifically purposes a, b and d, which are relevant to consideration of whether the land is Grey Belt. We set out our thoughts on these matters below.

Purpose A of the Green Belt is to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas. Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) sets out that an area contributes strongly to this purpose where a site is free of existing development and lacks any physical feature(s) in reasonable proximity that could restrict and contain development. Sites are also likely to be adjacent or near to a large built-up area and if developed result in an incongruous pattern of development.

This site is situated on the edge of the Green Belt and it is clear that Matlock Road provides a legible physical feature which defines this edge. It is acknowledged that ribbon development exists on the south side of Matlock Road within the current Green Belt, however this comprises detached properties in large plots which are significantly set back from the road. There is significant tree planting along Matlock Road and with the exception of boundary walls and entrances, these properties are not significantly visible from Matlock Road.

There is no physical feature behind the proposed site which could contain the Green Belt should this site, or a wider area, be removed from the designation. Paragraph 149 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out that when defining Green Belt, plans should define boundaries clearly, using physical features that are readily recognisable and likely to be permanent.

Removing this site would also result in an incongruous pattern of development. To deliver between 8 and 10 houses on this site would not follow the prevailing character or density of development along the south side of Matlock Road and would result in development which was at odds with existing development and out of keeping with the local area.

On this basis we conclude, in accordance with guidance in the PPG, that this site contributes strongly to purpose (a) of the Green Belt, to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas. On this basis we do not consider the site to be Grey Belt Land.

Purpose B of the Green Belt is to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another. PPG identifies that to strongly contribute to this purpose a site should form a substantial gap between towns and result in the loss of visual separation. This site sits between Walton and Wingerworth and provides a substantial gap between them. Whilst visual separation is limited by the presence of woodland to the south, this nevertheless does not stop this site contributing to this purpose, and we suggest this contribution is moderate.

Purpose d relates to the preservation of setting and special character of historic towns. In this instance the site does not contribute to this purpose.

On this basis we conclude, in accordance with guidance in the PPG, that this site contributes strongly to purpose (a) of the Green Belt, to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas. Accordingly, , we conclude that the site does not meet the definition of Grey Belt.

It is noted that paragraph 148 of the NPPF identifies that where it is necessary to release Green Belt land for development, plans should give priority to previously developed land, then consider grey belt which is not previously developed, and then other Green Belt locations.

This site is listed as ‘Redundant Nursery Land’, which implies that this may be considered to be previously developed land. There is no evidence to suggest that the site has ever been used for nursery purposes, with the land only ever being used for harvesting grassland for cattle feed. On this basis it is clear that this is agricultural land, and as per the glossary in the NPPF, cannot be classed as previously developed land.

Paragraph 142 of the NPPF is clear that the Government attached great importance to Green Belts and in Paragraph 145 that these should only be altered where exceptional circumstances are fully evidence and justified through the preparation or updating of plans.

The benefits of removing this site out of the Green Belt, to deliver between 8 and 10 houses, is negligible in the context of the overall housing need in the District and we do not consider that exceptional circumstances are justified for the release of this site. Development here would create incongruous development, which would not be in keeping with the prevailing character of the area and the revised Green Belt boundary would not be legible and well defined by existing features.

On Green Belt policy alone (and notwithstanding the LPA’s assessment that the site is not ‘suitable’) we strongly recommend that this site should be removed from further consideration as a potential allocation. In summary, the harm created would significantly outweigh any marginal benefits towards meeting housing needs.

Highways

There are two existing accesses to this site, a single width track to the east of the site and an access to the west, which is a wide enough to accommodate two vehicles.

The wider access to the west is located within the 40mph zone of Matlock Road and almost on the brow of the hill. When utilising this entrance it is difficult to see any distance in either direction and taking account of the speed of the road we consider there to be specific safety issues with any intensification of this access. We also note that highway comments in the LAA identified that “The topography presents a highway problem within the highway and within the site”.

The narrower access to the east is located within the 30mph zone and would need widening to achieve appropriate access. Highway comments in the LAA seem to favour the use of this access, and looking at the western access and safety concerns regarding this, that is understandable. However, this access appears to serve the listed building, Cherry Tree Farm. We consider that there may be adverse impacts on the setting of the listed building through the upgrading of this entrance to serve this site. We also note that if site 45034 ‘Land A at Cherry Tree Farm, Walton’ also utilised this access, that would result in a significant increase in traffic, further increasing the level of harm.

In addition to highway safety and heritage matters, placing an access to a new residential development so close to the boundary of an existing residential property (Ashcroft) is likely to lead to significant amenity concerns.

Highway comments in the LAA identifies that “While there are several footpaths in the surrounding area, none are immediately adjacent to the site. Pavements are located on the opposite side of the road, so a controlled crossing could be considered to improve pedestrian safety and support more sustainable travel options”. We consider that on a scheme of this number of dwellings a controlled crossing is unlikely to be viable and suggest therefore that the safety of users crossing the road is a strong concern.

Heritage

Within the site is the Grade II listed Cherry Tree Farmhouse. The LAA identifies that this will need to be excluded from the developable area. Whilst the listed building will not be directly affected by the development proposals, the site clearly provides the wider setting of the farmhouse and provides understanding of the identity of the listed building as a farmhouse.

An Ordnance Survey Map from 1883, shows the farmhouse sitting alone in a rural landscape. Whilst clearly the surrounding area has changed significantly and most of the appreciation of the setting is removed, this site and land to the south, provides the last links with the historical significance of the farmhouse.

Development of this site will have indirect impacts to the listed building through a change to its setting. Development will remove any of its association with a wider farmland setting, and accordingly there will be harm from development on the setting of a designated heritage asset. Paragraph 212 of the NPPF states that great weight should be given to an asset’s conservation and harm to the setting of the listed building weighs significantly against the allocation of this site.

Landscape

It is clear that Matlock Road provides a defined edge to Walton. Development on the south side of Matlock Road at the scale proposed, would be out of kilter with the surrounding development. The character of the southern side of Matlock Road is defined by detached properties in large plots, set back from the road.

Whilst there is some screening of the site, it is clear that the development would be visible from along both Matlock Road and from users of the Golf Course to the rear. There is a public footpath which runs through the golf course from which views of the development will be readily available. This adds to the sense that development here will be incongruous and out of character.

Sewage and surface flooding

The proposed development site is not served by a public sewage system. Properties along the south side of Matlock Road, including Cherry Tree Farm, do not have the benefit of being connected to a mains sewerage system and are served by septic tank systems which have operated satisfactorily over time. There is no main sewer in the road and as such drainage would be reliant on septic tanks or private treatments plants, adding to the complexity of development.

Conclusion

In the first instance this site should not have been taken forward due to its rating in the LAA. We fully support the conclusion in this assessment that the site has a suitability rating of ‘red’ and should be removed from any further consideration in accordance with the published LAA methodology.

In respect of Green Belt policy, this site should not be classed as Grey Belt. In accordance with the sequential approach to the release of sites, this site is within the lowest classification of priority. The development of 8-10 houses must also be weighed against the release of the Green Belt. Development here would create incongruous development, which would not been in keeping with the prevailing character of the area and the revised Green Belt boundary would not be legible and well defined by existing features. As such the harm from the Green Belt release would not be outweighed by the benefits of housing delivery.

Fundamentally, the benefits of allocating this site for development are significantly outweighed by the harm that would be created, both in respect of Green Belt and through wider considerations such as landscape, heritage and highways. We reasonably assume these factors are why the site was attributed a red rating by the LPA and on this basis the site should progress no further. We OBJECT to the site being a potential allocation and respectfully request that it be removed from the Local Plan process going forward.