Light industrial development at Land to North of Park Road, Stanton

What was proposed

The application sought to increase the building eaves height from three metres to six metres for a Class E(g) development.

“Executive Summary The site is located on Park Road Stanton, which is on the outskirts of Swadlincote within the Burton – Swadlincote Greenbelt and on the site on the former Bretby Colliery. The proposal seeks the variation of condition 4 of the previously approved application which restricted the eaves of the building to 3m. The proposal would increase the height of the buildings to 6m (to eaves).”

“8m from the proposed building. To the north and north-east of the application site is woodland area. The site is located outside of any settlement boundary and considered to be within the rural part of the District. The application site formed part of the former Bretby Colliery which closed in the 1960s, since then it has been used for various employment uses until approx. 2009 and thus is considered to be previously developed land.”

Officer report

Earlier planning permission

Outline permission for demolition and redevelopment with a light industrial and business development was approved in November 2024.

“Relevant planning history DMPA/2024/1024 - Outline application (matters of access and scale to be considered now with matters of layout, appearance and landscaping reserved for later consideration) for the demolition of the existing structures to allow for the construction of a light industrial & business development Class E(g) with access from Park Road - Approved 15 November 2024.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposal would support redevelopment of previously developed land without significant additional Green Belt or amenity harm.

“The proposed development at land to the north of Park Road, Stanton is considered to be acceptable firstly in terms of the principle, as the proposal is on previously developed land within the Green Belt, this has been established through the previously approved application DMPA/2024/1024. The current application seeks to vary condition 4 to allow for the eaves height to be increase from 3m to 6m.”

“This coupled with bringing a redundant site back into use and the clear economic benefits of the development for the Swadlincote Urban Area weigh in favour of the proposal.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Statutory consultees raised no objections, while the highways authority confirmed that approved access, parking and turning arrangements were unchanged.

“December 2025 - Having reviewed the submitted documentation it is evident that the approved access, parking and turning arrangements for the site are not altered as part of the application. Therefore, the Local Highway Authority (LHA) has no objections to the variation of Condition no. 4 of permission ref. DMPA/2024/1024.”

“December 2025 - As you are aware, the Coal Authority were consulted as part of the planning process for planning application: DMPA/2024/1024. We raised no objections to outline permission being granted by the LPA in our letter dated 03 September 2024. This was subject to the LPA imposing a suitably worded condition(s) to secure the undertaking of intrusive site investigations, prior to the submission of the reserved matters application.”

Officer report

Concerns from the public

Four members of the public raised concerns about building height, privacy, light, noise, disturbance and increased traffic.

“Representations have been received from four members of the public. These can be summarised as follows: a) There are concerns regarding the implications of a six meter high industrial building running the length of the neighbouring property b) Concerns over increased loss of amenity through loss of privacy c) It appears from the marketing report that more commercial vans and HGVs will access the site which cause noise and disturbance d) There will be an increase in vehicle…”

“A site notice was displayed and press notice published as part of the consultation process…”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector addressed the committee, followed by the local ward member, who raised residents’ concerns about neighbouring amenity.

What members considered

Members noted that the proposal would improve a site in very poor condition but preferred additional planting for screening.

“Following comments from the Local Ward Member and Objector the Planning Officer informed the Committee that the proposed building as a distance from the boundary of the neighbouring property and that boundary treatment could be covered by conditions.”

“Members considered the Application and noted that the proposal would only improve the site which was in very poor condition but additional planting for screening would be preferred.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application in line with the recommendation, adding a condition for increased landscaping beside the western boundary.

“That planning permission be approved as per the recommendations in the report of the Executive Director – Place and Prosperity subject to an additional condition to allow for increased landscaping adjacent to the western boundary.”

Minutes