AN ongoing cross-border council dispute surrounding a contentious development site which looked to have reached a solution has reignited.
South Derbyshire District Council had been at odds with its neighbours in East Staffordshire over plans to build on the former Drakelow Power Station site.
Although it falls in the boundary of South Derbyshire, East Staffordshire Borough Council had staked a claim for the site as an ‘extension of Burton’, and had earmarked it to form part of its major housing development plan over the next 20 years.
The borough council has since admitted defeat following fierce objection from council chiefs in South Derbyshire.
But the district council appears to have been irritated following a suggestion the space may be earmarked for employment development and is now seeking further clarification of its neighbouring authority’s intentions.
Council bosses in South Derbyshire had objected to the plans on what they saw as ‘their’ land as they felt this would then put pressure on them to find other areas elsewhere in the south of the county on which to build, putting greenfield sites at risk.
The district council welcomed the borough council’s commitment to build houses within East Staffordshire, but has demanded the removal of any proposed employment development plans.
A section of the borough council’s local plan, which sets out its development plans, has raised concerns across the border with chiefs in South Derbyshire branding the report as ‘ambiguous’ and ‘contradictory’.
The district council feels the borough council’s plan does not propose any need for employment land, before it goes on to say the land at Drakelow should be ‘taken into account’.
A report by the district council’s environmental and development committee said: “ESBC’s overall housing target appears to be soundly based and can be welcomed.
“Similarly, the borough council’s intention to provide for housing needs without relying on development at the former Drakelow Power Station can be supported, although an ambiguous reference to the availability of employment land at Drakelow should be removed or clarified.
“Ongoing liaison with the borough council would be welcomed.”