Nine detached dwellings at The Badger, Brockwell, Chesterfield

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Chesterfield Planning Committee on 10 Nov 2025.

CHE/25/00463/OUTApproved

What was proposed

Outline permission was sought to demolish the public house and build nine detached homes with access from Brockwell Lane.

“PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing building on site and erection of 9 detached dwellings, with access off Brockwell Lane…”

Officer report

The site and its history

The site contains a public house, parking, outdoor seating and a pub garden, with housing around it and playing fields and a play area behind.

“The application site is a public house located on Brockwell Lane, with residential development surrounding the site and a playing field and…”

Officer report

Earlier planning permission

An earlier application allowed the change of a private garden to a beer garden, subject to conditions, in 1990.

“CHE/1189/0812 – Permission for change of use from private garden to beer garden – Conditional permission 15.02.1990”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the policy harm was limited and the homes would provide significant housing, economic and social benefits.

“The planning application seeks the provision of nine dwellings, which would provide a meaningful contribution towards the areas housing land supply. There would be additional benefits associated with the scheme, including economic and social benefits through the construction of the proposal and the activities of future occupiers of the development. Such benefits carry significant weight.”

“The harm arising from the conflict with the development plan is considered to be limited and therefore the adverse impacts of the proposed development would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the proposal when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole. Consequently, the presumption in favour of sustainable development applies, as outlined in paragraph 11 d) of the NPPF.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Highways, wildlife, drainage, water, refuse and coal authorities raised no objections subject to conditions, while ward members made no representations.

“Highway Authority No objections raised, subject to four conditions and two informative notes.”

“Derbyshire Wildlife No objections raised, subject to conditions. Trust…”

Officer report

Concerns from residents

Five letters raised concerns about protecting the allotment water supply and the safety and position of the relocated bus stop.

“- Water supply crosses the application site under a long standing agreement with the original owners of the pub - Construction works could disrupt the water supply on either a temporary or permanent basis - Would like to ensure the water supply is protected or rerouted during the redevelopment - Concerns about the location of the bus stop - Consider the bus stop would be better just past Bungalow Close, where there are no yellow lines and visibility for cars will not be…”

“The concerns raised in respect of the relocation of the bus stop and highway safety have been addressed in the above report. Concerns relating to the water supply of a neighbouring landowner are civil matters. Consultations have been undertaken in accordance with the statutory requirements outlined in the Development Management Procedure Order 2015 (as amended). For a minor planning application, this does not require consultation with the emergency services.”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector and the agent addressed the committee.

The committee’s discussion

Members discussed concerns about the allotment water supply, open space and the relocated bus stop, and agreed an additional water-supply condition.

“The Committee considered the report and recommendations within it and Councillors noted the concerns raised around the water supply to the allotments, open space and the relocation of the bus stop.”

“An additional condition was agreed to be added as part of reserved matters as follows:”

Minutes

The vote

Councillor Miles moved, and Councillor Brittain seconded, that the officer recommendation should be upheld.

“It was moved by Councillor Miles and seconded by Councillor Brittain that the officer recommendation be upheld.”

Minutes

Councillors at the meeting

The minutes record this decision with no vote against, so each member present for this item is shown as voting for it.

Proposed by Councillor Keith Miles, seconded by Councillor Stuart Brittain.

Source: Plota analysis of the council's minutes; parties from the council's list of councillors.

Sources

  • Chesterfield Planning Committee minutes, 10 November 2025
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Chesterfield'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

Date
Monday 10 November 2025
Recommendation
Officers recommended approval
Committee decided
Approved
Councillors
11Labour 7Lib Dem 4Show votes
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)
Application
The application (council website)

This committee's year

15 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →