Derby Market Place regeneration decision

Credit: Marketing Derby

A decision on whether a £100 million redevelopment of Derby’s Market Place to replace the Assembly Rooms should be allowed has been put on hold.

A majority of five Derby councillors voted in favour of delaying a final decision after concerns were raised over design issues.

However, four voted to approve the scheme, with one saying residents of Derby expect councillors and officers to “get on with it”.

Derby City Council submitted major plans to redevelop the city centre area with new buildings and public open space.

The outline application focused on the creation of a new mixed-use building, as well as the construction of new offices and a four-star hotel.

The council’s Labour leadership group are keen to push forward the regeneration plans, which could see the Assembly Rooms building demolished possibly later this year.

They and council chiefs hope the development will bring “major investment, significant job creation and generate footfall” in the city centre.

The Assembly Rooms has stood empty for more than a decade after a serious fire caused its closure in 2014.

Demolition had been expected to start a couple of years ago. However, complications over certain planning conditions have caused delays.

Just weeks ago, the authority approved the appointment of developer partners to help “crack on” with major plans.

But council leader Nadine Peatfield said the next steps of the huge project were down to the council’s planning committee.

The committee met on Thursday night (May 14th) to discuss the application. At the start of the discussion councillors were shown a “fly-through” video of what the regeneration could look like.

Councillor Martin Rawson said: “I’m really excited about this. It’s the most exciting application we’ve had in years.

“I think it looks really good. There is an element of flexibility to allow the proposal to evolve.”

Councillor Sue Bonser also welcomed the application, saying she was pleased and it was “really important” that views of Derby Cathedral were not compromised.

But concerns were raised over the “bulky” design and specific details regarding the shape of the buildings.

Councillor Lucy Care said: “I am really concerned if we go with the detail in the design, we will end up what’s been presented, [something] rather square, rather bulky, rather unimaginative. Derby deserves better. 

“We are missing an opportunity to have something that’s more creative.”

Councillor Miles Pattison said the meeting’s discussion “made me pause” over what the final designs would look like and felt there were “limitations” with the proposals.

Councillor Care then proposed to defer a final decision with the hope of “tidying up” design issues within the next few weeks.

But Councillor Bonser replied: “I wouldn’t want to defer. I think Derby residents want us to make a decision and get on with it.” 

Four councillors voted in favour of deferring, while four other councillors voted to approve the scheme, meaning the vote was tied.

Chair of the committee Jerry Pearce then had the casting vote and opted to defer a decision – but told councillors he did not want it to “drag on”.

The meeting later heard that the next opportunity to make a decision on the application may not be until July.