The applicant disputed a council decision for the home to be allowed on a 'temporary' basis

An appeal has been lodged on a controversial children’s home in Derby – despite it being granted planning permission by elected officials.

‌

Councillors gave “temporary” permission to change the use of a family home to a dedicated children’s care home for a maximum of two children on St Cuthbert’s Road in September last year.

‌

But a Planning Inspector has ruled that allowing “temporary” permission was “unnecessary and unreasonable”. It means the property can be used as a children’s home permanently.

‌

Due to raised concerns in the community – including an objection from city MP Catherine Atkinson – councillors on Derby City Council’s planning committee allowed planning permission for one year so its impact could be reviewed.

Initially concerns were expressed on several matters including fears of anti-social behaviour, increased traffic and the plans “changing the character of the street”.

‌

In her objection, Ms Atkinson suggested the children’s home location was not “in the best interests of either the children who would be placed there or the residents who currently live on the street”.

But despite having the plans accepted, the applicant – referred to in documents as Mr Cummings – appealed the city council’s decision to allow temporary permission only.

‌

An appeal statement said: “A temporary condition to ‘assess’ suggests that the condition’s intent is to gather evidence rather than to mitigate an identified planning harm. If no harm has been identified, the condition is not necessary.”

The Inspectorate on this instance ruled in favour of the applicant. He said there was “no substantive evidence” to demonstrate that “a children’s home of this modest scale would generate impacts materially different from those arising from the property’s former use as a family dwelling”.

He said: “The removal of this element of this specific condition (temporary permission) and its effect upon the living conditions of neighbouring occupants would result in a development which would accord with the development plan.”

‌

However, the Planning Inspectorate did support the council’s decisions to place other conditions – which were also appealed against.

Mr Cummings had disputed the council’s requirement to submit a management plan before implementing the property’s change of use.

The council requested the management plan so it could learn more details about the operation of the children’s home, including staffing numbers and shifts, with the aim of “preventing undue disturbance or parking issues”.

‌

The applicant believed the condition was “unnecessary and unreasonable, noting that the highway authority raised no objection to the proposal”.

But this appeal was refused.

Read more - Council says sorry after giving fine to bus transporting disabled people

‌

Mr Cummings also objected to a condition which restricted the children’s care home to a maximum of two children.

It was argued the number of children accommodated within the property is governed by Ofsted regulations and “limiting occupancy to two children under Condition 5 may constrain any future flexibility that Ofsted might allow”.

But this was dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate who said his attention was “drawn to the application form and the description of development, which clearly state that the proposal is for the care of two children”.

We send out the biggest stories in an email every day. Sign up for the main Derbyshire Live newsletter here.

The driver turned to us for help after getting nowhere with the authority

Derby City Council has issued an apology after wrongfully fining a Nottingham council worker for using a bus layby and lane.

‌

Sergio Cantalamessa transports disabled passengers in his van, which is registered as a bus.

‌

He stopped in a bus layby at Morledge to drop off his passengers at the Derbion shopping centre on December 15.

‌

Shortly after, he received a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for using the bus stop, which he appealed right away.

His appeal, however, was thrown out and Derby City Council failed to recognise his vehicle as a bus.

His workplace also received another PCN, claiming he had wrongfully used the bus lane.

"My vehicle looks similar to an ambulance, but is registered as a bus," Sergio said.

"I have to use the bus layby to get my passengers, who are wheelchair users, as close to the centre as possible to ensure their safety.

"I can't just pull over at the side of the road as I need to open the back doors and use a ramp to disembark the passengers, and doing that in flowing traffic isn't safe.

"During my 22 years in this job, I've never had any issues using bus lanes or stops, so I was quite shocked and disheartened to receive this letter.

"It seemed ridiculous as I've done nothing wrong. I just thought to myself, come on, have a heart."

After his appeal was rejected, Sergio turned to Derbyshire Live for help.

"My boss has been very understanding, but I felt very helpless and it didn't seem fair to me at all," he added.

Derby City Council told Derbyshire Live today (February 9) that it had reviewed the appeal and removed both charges after receiving a copy of the vehicle logbook, which showed the vehicle was registered as a bus.

A spokesperson said: “Following correspondence with the vehicle owner, our teams have reviewed and cancelled this Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

“The appeal was rejected in error and we are very sorry for any distress caused because of this.

"We will be reviewing our systems to try and prevent something similar happening again in the future.”

More than half of the city's zero-rated food hygiene businesses are found within a square-mile

One of Derby City Council's food hygiene experts has had their say after figures show that Derby has more businesses with zero food hygiene ratings than Nottingham and Leicester combined - and more than half of these businesses are found within a square mile.

‌

Out of the 1,940 businesses eligible for a rating in the Derby City area, 12 of these businesses had a zero-rating, while Leicester has five and Nottingham has zero, despite having more overall businesses.

‌

Businesses can receive a score between zero and five after they are randomly visited by the city council's Environmental Health team, with a business being "non-compliant" with scores between zero and two, and "compliant" with a score of three or above.

‌

Derbyshire Live placed all the city's zero-rated businesses on a map and found a worrying trend, with seven of the dirty dozen being found in Pear Tree and Normanton.

Three of these businesses lie on Normanton Road itself, with another two found on side streets just a stone's throw away from the bustling shopping street. You can see the list of Derby zero-rated businesses in the Normanton/Pear Tree area, correct as of February 5, below:

With hopes of finding out why this corner of Derby has more zero-star ratings than its neighbours across the M1, we spoke with a local business owner who has been in the industry for decades.

Known only as Kami, the owner of one of Derbyshire's best takeaways, Cavendish Kebabs, has been studying the Food Standards Agency's rules and regulations for decades, having opened the Stenson Road business back in 2005.

He says having a good grasp of the rules is the biggest factor for most businesses, adding that "it's one thing following the rules, and another thing understanding why they are in place."

He continued: "People might look at the data and blame the council, but that's really never the case. They are strict, but they are also very understanding.

"In Normanton, for example, people know how to cook food, but they don't necessarily know how to run a business.

"We've been in the business for more than 20 years and, sure, we've made mistakes in the past. But I think a lot of these businesses will refuse to ask for help and guidance from the council.

"When we came into the industry, we had some knowledge, but we never thought it was going to be easy. One of the problems we see is people thinking they can just open a business and that's that, but it's the opposite.

"There have been occasions where we have approached the council with questions and they have given us advice and guidance to keep people safe. But will some businesses approach them when they need help? Probably not.

"But ultimately, it's a lack of effort which results in poor scores.

"We start cleaning when it becomes quiet at around 9pm, maybe an hour before closing, and we'll clean until it is spotless every night, which is usually until around 1am.

"That's the effort and standards required every day. And when it comes down to inspection time, we don't panic, there are no issues."

We asked Jangir Khan, a Labour councillor for the Normanton Ward, why he believes the area has such a high number of non-compliant businesses.

He said: "They do try to comply from what I can see, and they must be aware of the standards required.

"Business seems to be thriving on the most part, as you look down Normanton Road you see all the businesses doing well with lots of customers, takeaways, restaurants and cafes.

"The environmental health officers (EHO) are there to ensure standards are kept, and it's good to see businesses are being regularly assessed for our safety.

"Some businesses are owned by people from minority groups, and maybe there are some things they are not aware of that they need to be trained to do - they need to be making sure they keep up with the high standards for the customer.

"As a local authority, we need to continue to be on top of that, but I'd also hope that the EHO also gives the struggling businesses what they need to thrive.

"It's not good to see the poor ratings in the area, but it is a good sign that the council are intervening.

"Businesses are owned by people from all sorts of different communities, and maybe some people are lacking the knowledge, and maybe don't understand the severity of the issues."

Elizabeth Osterholm has led Derby City Council's Environmental Health team for more than two decades, and says her team will work in a similar way as other authorities in the East Midlands.

While Elizabeth does acknowledge the higher rate of zero-rated businesses across Derby, she has reminded locals that more than 96 per cent of the city's eateries are "compliant" with regulation.

Speaking on why she thinks Pear Tree and Normanton may have a higher rate than elsewhere in the city, she continued: "I can't say for definite why it may be the case, but obviously there is a high density of businesses in that area.

"A lot of the premises in that area tend to be takeaways, which statistically, when compared to schools or care homes, for example, do tend to have a higher rate of non-compliant businesses.

"We also see a lot of premises change hands in that area, but the businesses that tend to do well upon inspection are often well-established - so it's more likely that we'd see new businesses struggle with following the regulations."

Elizabeth added that businesses have to pay and wait for a rescore if they are not happy with their rating, but some decide not to - even though inspectors may have visited again, and standards may have improved.

"The only businesses that usually apply for a rescore are the ones that trade on platforms such as Just Eat and Uber Eats, which require businesses to have a minimum score," she added.

Speaking on the overall standards in recent years, Elizabeth added that there was a decline in standards across the board following the pandemic.

"Post-covid, standards were quite poor, but that was mainly due to premises not having inspections for the two years prior. But we did see a drop in standards overall.

"But, at the moment, we seem to be on a slow incline back to where we were before the pandemic, but it's still difficult with businesses opening and closing so frequently.

"More inner-city businesses tend to struggle, and a place like Derby simply isn't comparable with the Derbyshire Dales, for example."

Derbyshire councils have stressed how important it is for everyone to keep providing input with the launch of the latest consultation into the county’s proposed changes for the future delivery of services under the Government’s Local Government Reorganisation plans.

The Labour Government is aiming to set up single, unitary authorities across England with an elected mayor in two-tier authority areas like Derbyshire as part of LGR plans by scrapping and merging city, county, borough and district councils.

And on February 5 the Government launched a seven-week statutory consultation for residents, businesses, public bodies and other organisations to provide their views following two previous public consultations.

Derbyshire County Council has proposed one single unitary council for Derby and Derbyshire while seven of the district and borough councils and Derby City Council have proposed four possible variations on a ‘One Derbyshire, Two Councils’ model with one northern unitary authority and one southern unitary authority.

And although Derbyshire Dales District Council opted not to submit proposals it has indicated a preference for two unitary councils for Derbyshire including northern and southern authorities.

Council advocates of the ‘One Derbyshire, Two Councils’ model stated: “All councils in Derbyshire were asked to respond to the Government’s call to simplify and transform the way council services are delivered to local people in the future.

“The needs of our communities – now and in the future – are at the heart of our plan to create two new unitary councils covering all of Derbyshire, and its development was shaped by technical evidence and thousands of contributions from local residents and organisations.

“This next stage allows Government to gather further views before reaching a decision on which proposal to implement.”

LGR plans aim to ideally set up single, unitary authorities across England with an elected mayor in two-tier authority areas like Derbyshire which currently operate with a county council and then with borough and district councils which could all be scrapped and merged under LGR in a bid for greater efficiency and financial savings.

The Government’s statutory consultation is seeking views on the Derbyshire councils’ total of five proposals for the county including the county council’s proposal for one unitary authority and the other district and borough councils’ four different variations on the ‘One Derbyshire, Two Councils’ model.

Derbyshire’s Derby city, district and borough councils’ ‘One Derbyshire, Two Councils’ proposal includes four variations with differing options, dubbed A, A1, B and B1, selected by each of these councils relating to different sizes, populations and north-south boundary lines.

NE Derbyshire and Bolsover opted for A1 for NE Derbyshire, Chesterfield, Bolsover, High Peak, Derbyshire Dales and part of the Amber Valley to be in one northern unitary council, and Derby City, Erewash, South Derbyshire, and part of Amber Valley to be in a southern unitary council.

Chesterfield, High Peak, Erewash and Derby City opted for B1 with Chesterfield, NE Derbyshire, Bolsover, Derbyshire Dales, High Peak and a slightly different part of Amber Valley to be in the northern council while the southern council would include Derby City, Erewash, Southern Derbyshire and a slightly different part of Amber Valley.

Amber Valley has opted for option A for Chesterfield, NE Derbyshire, Bolsover, High Peak, Derbyshire Dales and Amber Valley in the northern council and a southern council area including Derby City, South Derbyshire and Erewash.

South Derbyshire has opted for option B for Chesterfield, NE Derbyshire, Bolsover, Derbyshire Dales and High Peak in the northern council and the southern council would include Derby City, Erewash, South Derbyshire and Amber Valley.

One of the main issues under the ‘One Derbyshire, Two Councils’ appears to be where Amber Valley will fall with some of the councils wanting different parts of Amber Valley in the north and the south, while Amber Valley wants to be in a northern unitary council, and South Derbyshire District Council wants Amber Valley to be in a southern unitary council.

Advocates for the proposed ‘One Derbyshire, Two Councils’ model, have argued it will keep the councils connected to local residents and their needs, transform and provide effective value for money services while preserving local identity and protecting Derbyshire’s historic boundaries.

While Derbyshire County Council has claimed its proposal for a single unitary authority will create a more cost effective system with greater savings and avoid a geographical split unlike the city, borough and district councils’ ‘One Derbyshire, Two Councils’ proposal.

Reform UK Derbyshire County Council Leader, Cllr Alan Graves, has said: “It’s clear that creating a single unitary council covering the whole of Derby and Derbyshire is in the best interests of all residents and businesses in the area.

“Creating one new council would save millions of pounds every year compared to the current system of Local Government and options for creating two unitary councils.

“It would also cost less to set up and would be less disruptive as major county council services such as adult care and highways would not need to be separated out over two areas – which would be more costly as our financial analysis shows.”

The Government is planning for new LGR areas to include elected mayors with more powers on planning and transport and it has argued that the changes will create savings, create greater efficiency, improve public services, and support economic growth.

But critics are concerned about the loss of councils and councillors with Derbyshire to be reduced from 447 councillors to 162 if the LGR plans go ahead alongside concerns for the future of jobs.

Critics also fear a loss of local control with a risk of greater Government influence, the removal of local decision-making, tax increases, powers being taken away from communities and doubts about whether the plans will create savings.

Bolsover District Council’s Chief Executive, Karen Hanson, has stressed that following a decision expected this summer on the preferred LGR proposal for Derbyshire a joint committee will oversee structural changes and there could be potential redundancies at the district council’s higher levels but other staffing is expected to remain largely unchanged because services will still be needed.

The UNISON union has stated that LGR in Derbyshire must be about levelling up communities and strengthening public services with proper funding and protection for employees and not about cutting costs or putting jobs at risk.

And NE Derbyshire District Council Managing Director, Lee Hickin, has previously said the district council acknowledges there is anxiety concerning jobs and staff, recruitment and funding plans which may prove to be difficult areas as councils continue to face an uncertain future.

Bolsover District Council and NE Derbyshire District Council have recently outlined council tax increases for 2026-27 with some caution to support continued service delivery as they both cited the uncertainty posed by LGR.

Ms Hanson, of Bolsover District Council, and the district council’s Interim Director for Planning, Devolution and Corporate Policy, Sarah Kay, explained that following the seven-week statutory consultation on all the submitted proposals with input from residents, businesses, local authorities and public bodies a decision is expected in the summer of 2026 on how Local Government is to be reorganised.

Under the Government’s current timetable, elections to the new shadow authorities could take place in May, 2027, and the new unitary councils could start to operate by April or May, 2028, according to Bolsover District Council.

There are no proposals to cancel any town and parish council elections during the planned transition, according to Ms Hanson, because town and parish councils are not directly affected by LGR although some more guidance may follow from the Government about ‘neighbourhood elements’.

Ms Hanson also said that she assumes the Government will make a decision whether the Bolsover District Council’s elections – which would ordinarily take place in May, 2027 – will happen or not or be deferred as has been decided for some others elsewhere in the country.

The seven-week statutory consultation is the next milestone in the Government’s LGR process which will see the biggest shake up of local councils for more than 50 years.

It is a formal, legally‑required process which must be carried out by the Government before it can make a final decision on which proposal to support.

The statutory consultation is separate to the two local LGR public consultations, with one previously organised by Derbyshire County Council and the other held by the districts, boroughs and Derby City Council, which ran last summer and helped to shape the current proposals.

Derbyshire residents, businesses and organisations are now being encouraged to have their say on the final proposals in this next round of consultation, which closes on March 26.

The councils have also been invited to submit formal responses to the consultation.

Results will help the Government understand what people and organisations think about each of the proposals, before ministers make a final decision in the summer.

Advocates for the ‘One Derbyshire. Two Councils’ model stated: “Our shared priority remains ensuring that any future arrangements deliver effective, sustainable and responsive services for the people of Derbyshire, and we would encourage residents, businesses and organisations to take part in the consultation.”

People can find out more about the proposals – and submit their views – via the Government’s website: Local government reorganisation in Derbyshire and Derby – GOV.UK

Printed copies will be made available at public buildings including council offices, libraries and sports centres. Alternative formats of all documents should be requested by contacting the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) at: AlternativeFormats@communities.gov.uk

The results of the consultation will help inform the Government’s decision on how local government should be structured in the county area of Derbyshire in the future. A final decision is expected in mid-2026.

Under the Government’s current timetable, elections to any new shadow authority or authorities would take place in 2027, and the new unitary council or councils would start to operate on April 1, 2028.

Young Arthur is just 17 months old and is facing a lengthy stay at Great Ormond Street hospital

The parents of a Derbyshire toddler who is one of 15 people across the world with a rare genetic condition have made a plea for support as they face months with no income.

‌

Doctors first thought that 17-month-old Arthur Peters had Down's syndrome in the days after his birth, having shown symptoms such as a lack of feeding and low muscle tone.

‌

His parents, Ashleigh Dennington and Levi Peters, from Clay Cross, took Arthur for numerous tests and scans.

‌

After tests for both Down's and Prader-Willi syndrome came back negative, they were still searching for answers.

Arthur then spent three weeks in hospital and more problems arose, with doctors eventually carrying out a microarray, which analyses genetic variations.

They found that a tiny piece of his chromosome 16 was missing, which led to a diagnosis of the "extremely rare" 16p13.11 microdeletion syndrome.

Ashleigh, 24, says symptoms for the condition vary, with some people having little to no side effects, whereas others can be severely disabled.

Arthur has problems with his bowels, kidneys, heart and various other organs, but his tracheal stenosis, described as an "abnormal narrowing of the windpipe", is set to result in a lengthy stay at Great Ormond Street Hospital in London.

"Arthur's airway is supposed to be 10mm at his age, but his is only 2mm," said Ashleigh, who is currently out of work alongside Levi as they continue to provide round-the-clock care for Arthur.

"He's always been poorly with his chest. He's had pneumonia and bronchitis on and off, but I'm talking weekly, so it's really severe.

"His airway is the size that it would have been when I was around 30 weeks pregnant, and it hasn't grown since."

The surgery in London would see doctors cut Arthur's windpipe in half, slice the top half and slice the bottom half, before putting them back together.

After surgery, Arthur will be put on a heart-lung bypass, something which Ashleigh describes as "basically life support" - something that would see Arthur "basically asleep" for three months.

This would mean a six-month stay in London for the family, followed by a 12-month recovery at home, which, if all goes well, will allow Arthur to breathe properly.

Ashleigh and Levi, who have already spent a considerable amount of money on fuel and constant trips to Sheffield for treatment, now face months without income as they temporarily move to London to support Arthur throughout his treatment.

"It's obviously really scary knowing that he's got to have something so big done," said Ashleigh. "When he goes in for surgery, it'll be a number of months before we see him awake again.

"But after such a long time of trying to get answers to what's going on, it's a good thing that he's having it done. I'll just be glad that he's able to breathe, really."

Despite the joy of a solution on the horizon, the couple now faces the very real problem of financing trips back and forth between London and Clay Cross, with one-way train fares often exceeding £80.

A fundraiser has been set up by Arthur's great-aunt, Bethany Ward, as Arthur's family and friends look to support the couple over the coming year.

After just 24 hours, more than £1,200 has been raised from 23 donations, with some totalling more than £100 each.

Speaking on the remarkable support in recent days, Ashleigh added: "It's amazing, I'm really glad there are people who want to help him.

"Of course, friends and family know about his issues, but to see people from all over donating is really nice.

"Arthur is a lovely boy, he functions really well and he's really happy considering the condition he has.

"It's just difficult, of course, looking out for medical episodes like seizures, and we need to peg-feed him regularly, so staying on top of that can be challenging."

Anyone wishing to donate to Ashleigh and Levi can do so by clicking the link here.

Arthur was set to have his operation this week, however, it has been pushed back until the end of the month - although Ashleigh says the date is still not set in stone and could be delayed further.