Distribution warehouses at Land South Of Sleaford Road, Coddington

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Newark And Sherwood Planning Committee on 4 Dec 2025.

24/02218/OUTMApproved

What was proposed

The application sought outline permission for three large B8 storage and distribution units, ancillary offices, parking, landscaping and access, with maximum floorspace of 90,500 square metres.

“This application seeks outline planning permission for ‘Phase 2’ of the Newlink Business Park. The scheme proposes 3 large scale industrial units for B8 use (storage and distribution), similar to the building approved as ‘Phase 1’ under application reference 20/01452/OUTM, with ancillary offices, parking and landscaping. All matters would be reserved apart from access.”

“Access is proposed via the roundabout on the A17, which has been approved and completed as part of Phase 1 (shown on the plan above). As the application is for outline permission…”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The 38.9-hectare site is agricultural land outside Newark’s urban boundary, beside the existing Newlink Business Park and near Coddington’s conservation area.

“The application site covers 38.9 Ha of land situated to the south of the A17 and to the south and east of the large commercial storage and distribution buildings currently occupied by the Knowhow business group, known as Newlink Business Park. Agricultural land in between has consent for the development of a distribution warehouse (Phase 1), which is…”

“The site is located outside of the established Newark urban boundary and within the open countryside. It comprises five agricultural fields with associated field boundaries with a central woodland belt running in a north to south direction in the middle. The majority of the site is generally flat greenfield land, having been regularly cultivated and cropped as part of a larger arable field unit.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

The site had an environmental-impact screening decision, while the neighbouring Phase 1 distribution scheme was previously refused by committee and allowed on appeal.

“24/SCR/00004 Request for EIA Screening opinion for an Employment Development on land to the East and South of Newlink Business Park in connection with Pre application PREAPM/00075/24 – Environmental Impact Assessment required.”

“20/01452/OUTM Development of site for distribution uses (Use Class B8) including ancillary offices and associated works including vehicular and pedestrian access, car parking and landscaping (all matters reserved apart from access) – refused by Planning Committee and subsequently allowed at appeal subject to conditions – 29.11.2022”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because significant employment, investment, public-space and biodiversity benefits were considered to outweigh conflict with countryside policy and identified harm.

“The proposed development would be an expansion of ‘Phase 1’ of Newlink Business Park’ and the site is well connected to the major highway network. The development would bring about significant economic benefits including approximately 1000 jobs, as well as jobs throughout the construction phase, and significant investments into the district.”

“In considering the planning balance, the public benefits of the scheme including significant job creation (estimated 1000 jobs, not inclusive of the jobs during construction) and significant investment into the district, weigh heavily in favour of the development. It is acknowledged that the location is not within the urban boundary, however given the close proximity to it, and the connections to the wider road network, the location is not considered unsustainable.”

Officer report

Who spoke at the meeting

A parish council representative spoke against the application, while a town council representative and the agent spoke in support.

What members discussed

Members discussed cumulative noise and lighting, access from nearby villages, employment skills, solar panels, building scale and appearance, the earlier appeal and biodiversity benefits.

“Members considered the application with the adjacent Ward Member commenting as to whether there would be cumulative impact in relation to noise and lighting from Phase 1 of the development. She added that she welcomed the employment opportunities but had concerns regarding the ability to travel to the site, noting that there was no footpath from Coddington or Winthorpe.”

“Members debated a number of issues, including the potential scale and appearance of the new buildings, the relevance of the appeal decision from the adjacent unit and the benefits of the BNG offer.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee unanimously approved planning permission, subject to the reported conditions and a legal agreement.

“AGREED (unanimously) that planning permission be approved, subject to conditions in the report and the S106 Agreement.”

Minutes

The members' reasons

“In acknowledging the employment opportunities at the site, a Member noted that the majority of these might be for low-skilled workers and queried whether the developer would give consideration to upskilling their workforce.”

Minutes

Source: the council's minutes, quoted word for word.

Sources

  • Newark And Sherwood Planning Committee minutes, 4 December 2025
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Newark And Sherwood'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
Thursday 4 December 2025
Recommendation
Officers recommended approval
Committee decided
Approved
Vote
Unanimous
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)
Application
The application (council website)

This committee's year

19 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 3 against officer advice.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →