78,217 sqm employment development at Land East Of Pinxton Lane Junction, Sutton in Ashfield
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Ashfield Planning Committee on 4 Mar 2026.
What was proposed
The application sought outline permission for up to 78,217 square metres of B2 and B8 employment space, access, infrastructure and demolition of two farms.
“3BPROPOSAL Application Made in Accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations) 2017: Outline Application with all Matters Reserved Except Access for the demolition of Grange Farm and Cuttings Farm and associated buildings, Pinxton Lane, Sutton-in-Ashfield and for the erection of up to 78,217 sqm of employment uses in Classes B2 (general industrial) and B8 (storage and distribution) with ancillary offices, together with the…”
“The Application This is an application made in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations) 2017 seeking outline planning permission (with all matters reserved expect for access) for the erection of up to 78,217sqm of employment uses in Classes B2 (general industrial) and B8 (storage and distribution) with ancillary offices and the provision of supporting infrastructure including access, drainage works, landscaping and related…”
Officer report
The site
The approximately 33-hectare site comprises agricultural fields and farm buildings east of Castlewood Business Park, with existing access from Pinxton Lane.
“Site Description The site amounts to approximately 33 hectares of agricultural fields alongside Grange Farm and Cuttings Farm and includes their associated buildings. It is rectangular in shape and located to the east of the Castlewood Business Park to the south of the A38. The site slopes away to the south, thereby presenting an opportunity to work with the topography to limit potential perceived negative landscape impact.”
“Adjacent to the site access to Pinxton Lane is the R.E.A.L Education Centre, this facility is under separate ownership and is excluded from the site boundary. It is proposed that this would be retained as part of any development of the site but an improved access within the site to this facility would be required.”
Officer report
Earlier planning history
An earlier scoping opinion for a business and industrial park found that environmental impact assessment was required.
“Relevant Planning History SO/2021/0002: Scoping Opinion Request for Development of a Business/Industrial Park Comprising Development in Use Classes B2, B8 and E (g) Decision: Environmental Impact Assessment required. 31/01/2022.”
“Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Opinion The proposed development falls within the description contained at Paragraph 10 (a) ‘Industrial Estate Development Projects’ of Schedule 2 to the 2017 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations, and meets the criteria set out in column 2 of the table in that schedule.”
Officer report
What officers recommended
Officers recommended approval because the economic, employment and skills benefits would outweigh countryside policy conflict, with impacts addressed through mitigation and conditions.
“Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development The strategic Local Plan policy for development in the countryside is policy EV2. As set out in the ‘Principle’ section of this assessment, this proposal does not accord with any of the criteria where development may be considered acceptable in the countryside, and therefore there is conflict with local planning policy.”
“The benefits listed above can be secured through planning conditions at outline stage and would, it is considered, outweigh the conflict with policy EV2 of the ALPR. It is therefore recommended that outline consent be granted, subject to the below conditions, and a Section 106 legal agreement.”
Officer report
What consultees said
Highways, ecology, drainage, environmental health and other consultees generally raised no objection or sought conditions, while archaeology identified a rare late Saxon charcoal hearth.
“ADC Environmental Health Ground Contamination A Phase 1 Geo-Environmental Assessment provides sufficient information to recommend approval subject to a condition requiring the submission and implementation of a remediation scheme to deal with the potential ground contamination.”
“NCC Archaeology The evaluation trenching recorded a cluster of features around several trenches. Trench 12 produced evidence of a late Saxon charcoal hearth which is rare and significant for Nottinghamshire. The second phase of trenching should help to define those areas better, as well as giving information for the rest of the site. This phase of trenching, as well as a mitigation scheme that it will inform should be conditioned.”
Officer report
What residents said
Five objections cited privacy, traffic, countryside and agricultural land loss, landscape, wildlife, pollution and construction effects; two responses were neutral and one supported jobs.
“Loss of privacy to nearby properties • Existing storage/distribution space is readily available in the locality • Highway impact o Increased traffic and congestion o Poor condition of the local highway network would be exacerbated o Consideration should be given to reducing the speed limit on the A38 o Cycleway alongside the A38 is insufficient (too close to the roadway) • Loss of countryside and agricultural land • Change in character to the landscape and loss of views •…”
“Sustainability credentials should be considered • Historical land uses haven’t been investigated in adequate detail • Impact on local health – air quality • Disruption during construction – noise • Light pollution from the development • Adjacent land should be included within the proposal • Loss in property value…”
Officer report
Who spoke
The agent addressed the committee on behalf of the applicant, after which members could clarify points raised.
The committee discussion
Conditional consent was moved and seconded in accordance with the officer recommendation.
“It was moved and seconded that conditional consent be granted, as per the officer’s recommendation contained in the report.”
Minutes
Sources
- Ashfield Planning Committee minutes, 4 March 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Ashfield's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Ashfield Planning Committee
- Council
- Ashfield
- Date
- Wednesday 4 March 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Ashfield committee decisions →
This committee's year
15 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 1 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.