Derby’s housing need – one of core reasons for Derbyshire’s 10 councils becoming two with north-south Amber Valley split

The Belper Mills complex. Image from Eddie Bisknell.

Derby’s housing need is one of the core reasons the Government chose to replace Derbyshire’s 10 councils with two on a north-south split through Amber Valley, ministers have revealed.

In a letter to Derby and Derbyshire’s councils, Steve Reed, the Secretary of State for housing, communities and local government, detailed the reasons for his decision which was made last week.

Mr Reed had stressed in his announcement that a core reason for the reshuffle was to aid cities which have constrained boundaries which restrict housing growth.

He said: “Some of our smaller cities are highly productive, but have been constrained by tight boundaries, set decades ago, which stop them from building the homes they need.”

In his letter to Derbyshire councils, seen by the Local Democracy Reporting Service, Mr Reed says his decision hinges on housing growth space for Derby.

Mr Reed details that one council would focus on mining towns, rural areas and the Peak District, hinging on Chesterfield, while the other would focus on business, enterprise and “the needs of Derby”.

For critics, this is entirely what was expected and feared, with concern that the north cannot rely wholly on rural tourism for economic growth and the southern areas – many of which are heavily rural – would not welcome a Derby housing focus.

He said: “The two unitary options, including my selected option, enable a dual-engine growth model, with a northern unitary anchored around Chesterfield able to focus on the economic opportunities of rural areas including the Peak District National Park, such as the aggregates industry and the visitor economy. 

“The southern unitary would then be able to focus on economic opportunities, such as clean energy, defence and advanced manufacturing, and housing growth around Derby City, in line with the combined authority’s economic priorities.

“The majority of the two unitary options enable the expansion of Derby City and would support growth more broadly, although I note that the two unitary proposal submitted by Amber Valley Borough Council (pushing it into the northern council) does not provide for Derby’s expansion to the north in the same way as the other two unitary options.

“In my view the modified option improves alignment with travel-to-work and movement patterns and has clearer, more sensible northern and southern economic geographies centred on the urban centres of Chesterfield and Derby. 

“I also judge the modified option will better allow communities within Amber Valley to form stronger northern or southern connections to align with those areas based on their local identities.”

Concerns have also been raised about how one smaller northern Derbyshire council can handle the pressures of road repairs such as the Snake Pass landslips, which are already too large for one county council to cover, with Government backing out of further support.

Meanwhile, the pressure for the smaller southern half to deliver major roadworks to support housing and traffic through the region would also be more difficult, it has been said.

Mr Reed says the boundary change needed to carve Amber Valley in half would make the process more expensive and complicated due to the need to split its finances and services.

However, he claims that the split of Amber Valley achieves “better outcomes” through a more equal population divide, council tax base and services between the two new councils.

He said he is aware the two council split would take longer to pay back set-up costs than the one-council pitch from Derbyshire County Council.

The north-south split will see Belper, Denby, Duffield, Horsley, Horsley Woodhouse, Kedleston, Kilburn, Kirk Langley, Mackworth, Quarndon, Shipley and Smalley being pulled into the southern council, while all other areas of Amber Valley will be in the northern council.

Bolsover, Chesterfield, Derbyshire Dales, High Peak and North East Derbyshire councils abolished and, with the upper half of Amber Valley (21 parishes), will form the northern council.

Meanwhile, Derby, Erewash and South Derbyshire councils will be scrapped and will form the southern council with the lower half of Amber Valley (14 parishes).

Overall, this council reshuffle is set to see 447 councillors replaced with 162, though that detail is yet to be finalised, the LDRS has been told.

Mr Reed makes clear that any local elections planned for next May, would now be replaced with elections to the “shadow councils”.

Existing councillors would have their terms extended by a year, up to their council’s termination and replacement with the new authorities.

This effectively means the elections in Amber Valley, Bolsover, Chesterfield, Derby, Derbyshire Dales, Erewash, High Peak, North East Derbyshire and South Derbyshire have been cancelled.

Instead, there will be elections next May for the northern and southern Derbyshire councils, which have yet to be named, with those councils to come into force from April 2028.