Derbyshire Dales District Council

The committee moved away from a 48-hectare employment land scenario and accepted officer advice that a trend-based requirement of 15 to 18 hectares was more realistic. Officers said this better reflects the district's deliverable supply and market conditions.

Members rejected the proposal to dispose of a wooded landholding at Worksworth by auction, after debate about biodiversity, public access, tree protection, and possible housing use. Officers said the land was surplus, had maintenance liabilities including ash dieback, and could attract a capital receipt, but the committee wanted further discussion with leaders and community input before any sale route is pursued.

Council approved £45,000 from reserves to fund two part-time Move More Coordinators. Officers said the roles are essential to the sports development team’s outreach, wellbeing, community activity and project delivery, and that recruitment can proceed with applicants already waiting.

Council approved an additional £5,000 supplementary revenue budget for the Gritstone Road appeal review working group, taking the total budget to £20,000. The funding is to secure an independent person and allow the review to progress without delay or a further council referral.

The committee approved a new asset management plan covering 2025-2030, replacing an outdated 2018 framework. The plan was drafted with CIPFA support, aligned to the council’s corporate priorities, and designed to guide property decisions, disposals, community asset transfers, decarbonisation, and future local government reorganisation data gathering.

The council approved its treasury management strategy, retaining the principle of security ahead of liquidity ahead of yield. Officers said the strategy was similar to last year and would continue to be monitored through quarterly reporting.

The committee considered four planning applications, with most debate centring on access, parking, flood risk, heritage impacts, and footpath rights. One application for a former cadet hut was deferred pending resolution of a disputed footpath, while two housing schemes in Matlock were approved and refused respectively on access, information and heritage grounds. A further self-build/brownfield scheme on the cliffs at Matlock was approved subject to conditions and a section 106 agreement.

The meeting focused heavily on capital spending decisions, affordable housing investment, and how to handle a large revenue underspend. Members also debated whether to set aside funds for local government reorganisation (LGR) implementation versus community regeneration and social housing, with strong concern about future financial pressure. A separate major discussion centred on the Matlock Bath Lovers Walk tufa shelter: whether to rebuild it, manage heritage and antisocial behaviour issues, and return with further costings and heritage advice. Several asset maintenance and parks/sports pitch issues were also raised as service pressures.