𝗦𝗞𝗛𝗚𝗕 𝗨𝗣𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗘

Today, SKHGB submitted a further formal objection to Amber Valley Borough Council. As soon as the objection is loaded on to the AVBC planning portal, we will provide a link.

This objection focuses on a key issue: the development still relies on uncertain future footpath and active-travel “mitigation” that has not been shown to be legally deliverable, physically possible, fully funded or capable of meeting the required standard.

Our submission highlights that:
• Kilburn Footpath 44 (runs south from Woodhouse Road, between numbers 34 and 36, and then along the western edge of the development site towards Horsley) has already been identified by Derbyshire County Council as a “critical constraint”, yet it is relied upon as a key pedestrian and active-travel link from the site to Arthur Medical Centre, Kilburn shops, the Post Office and the Co-op in Horsley Woodhouse
• The route is extremely constrained, narrowing to around 0.9m, with a fixed pinch point of around 1.0m between existing residential buildings on Woodhouse Road, meaning it cannot realistically be widened to a safe or inclusive standard
• The path is unlit, enclosed, poorly surfaced and has limited natural surveillance, making it unattractive and potentially unsafe for everyday use, especially in winter, poor weather or darkness
• The route is not suitable for wheelchair users, mobility scooters, pushchairs, children, older residents or cyclists, and does not provide a credible shared-use route for pedestrians and cyclists
• Footpath 28 (runs between Horsley Road and Derby Road, parallel to Derby Road) appears to rely on an informal path towards Derby Road, but its legal status, public accessibility and practical deliverability remain unresolved, with access currently affected by gates and Biodiversity Net Gain works
• Footpath 31 (runs from Horsley Road to junction with Footpath 28) passes through rural, actively farmed land and has not been shown to be capable of being converted into a safe, inclusive, attractive or LTN 1/20-compliant active-travel route

SKHGB’s objection makes clear that AVBC should not accept vague promises of future mitigation through Section 106 agreements, planning conditions or later feasibility work unless the routes are proven to be deliverable now.

The financial implications are also significant, with the cumulative infrastructure and mitigation burden already estimated to exceed £7.1 million and potentially to exceed £10 million once all outstanding requirements are fully defined and costed.

Our position is simple: 𝗶𝗳 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝟭𝟬𝟲 𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗼𝗰𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗺𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗱 𝘂𝗽𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗩𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗦𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗶𝗿𝗰𝘂𝗺𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗲𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗳𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁, 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗺𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝘅𝗲𝗱, 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗵𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲, 𝗲𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲, 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗱, 𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱, 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝘀𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗯𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘀 𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗱.

This application should not be approved on the basis of uncertain future promises or proposed mitigation that may never be capable of delivery.

For these reasons, SKHGB has again urged Amber Valley Borough Council to refuse the application.

𝗣𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲
Every share helps more local people stay informed and engaged.
SKHGB is already reaching a significant number of households across Kilburn and Horsley, but there are still many residents who may not yet be aware of the scale or implications of this application.

If you value clear, factual updates on what is happening and what it could mean for our area, please help widen the reach by sharing this post and inviting friends, neighbours and family to follow the facebook page.