159-home mixed-use scheme at Land At Blythe Park, Cresswell

What was proposed

The application proposed 159 homes, community uses, a community centre with retail space, a games area, play area, parking and drainage features.

“In addition to the housing, land within the application site boundary includes a community centre incorporating a retail unit (within the former ‘club building’), a multi- use games area (MUGA) play area, car parking and sustainable drainage features.”

“Changes to the housing numbers: original RM submission proposed 157, interim revised plans proposed 167 and final scheme proposes 159; • Changes to the housing mix: the final mix being a balance between commerciality and practicality but also the need to improve the overall design • Changes to affordable housing tenures: the final mix seeking to respond to the LPAs housing officers comments • Design improvements including: o Creation of gateway features on entrance to…”

Officer report

Earlier permissions

An outline permission allowed up to 168 homes and related uses; access was later changed from a roundabout to a T-junction following an appeal.

“SMD/2021/0829 Application for Variation of condition 4 in regard to outline application SMD/2014/0576 [Note: this essentially means that the original roundabout access is replaced by a simple T- junction as now shown as part of these reserved matters application.]”

“In addition to the above, application SMD/2025/0013 is currently pending to vary conditions 4 & 12 of SMD/2021/0829 which relates to alterations the Uttoxeter Road/ Cresswell Lane junction to address feedback and land ownership issues within the highway. The amendments relate to change the design of the access arrangements to 237- 247 Uttoxeter Road.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to conditions, finding the scheme sustainable and acceptable in design, amenity, flooding, highways, landscape, ecology and planning balance terms.

“The submitted scheme demonstrates that the form and scale of the development is appropriate and compatible with its surroundings and would not detract from the character of the area. Detailed design discussions have been undertaken between the applicant and officers to ensure that the scheme is delivered to a high standard with several changes negotiated through the life of the application including changes to the hierarchy of streets, parking arrangements and the…”

“The scheme includes a suite of landscape plans for both the public and private amenity spaces with many of these contributing to a strong green infrastructure network that would provide biodiversity benefits. As noted in the report the scheme whilst not required to deliver biodiversity net gain (given when it was submitted) but the scheme does deliver some biodiversity benefits / habitat enhancements and creates a networks of green infrastructure.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected, while highways, flood risk, housing, environmental health, education, police and other consultees raised no objection subject to requirements.

“Should have been better consultation, in person rather than online. SMDC Regeneration - Affordable Housing No objection Housing officer has been consulted throughout the development of the proposals and has previously raised concerns over the site and amenity space in some of the dwellings. These matters have been the subject of amendments. The final comments on the affordable housing mix were received in September 2025.”

“Overall, there is no objection from a housing or affordability perspective to this site subject to it being delivered in line with the S106 or any agreed variation). Environmental Health No objection 11.07.22: There are pre-commencement environmental health conditions set out in the outline permission (SMD/2018/0789) which should be addressed and discharged prior to development starting on this site Alliance Environmental Services No objection 23.10.24: Confirmed no waste…”

Officer report

Residents’ views

Sixty-eight representations objected over housing scale, traffic, access, flooding, design, greenfield loss, ecology, drainage and local services; two supported the scheme.

“Overdevelopment/Scale of housing - too many houses for a rural locality. • Sandon Road and the surrounding road network is already congested during peak hours and the proposed development will make this worse. • Concerns about safety of pedestrian and cyclists on a busy road with a lot of HGV traffic and where there is an absence or limited footpaths. • Access road – conflict with commercial and residential use and not adequately sized.”

“Lack of green space in the development. • Development does not follow the neighbourhood plan’s design principles. • Shared boundaries with existing properties will result in a loss of privacy and outlook and disruption caused during construction.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s representative spoke for the application, while three parish councillors spoke against it.

Members’ discussion

Members welcomed green space, landscaping, affordable housing and community benefits, and discussed separation distances, design, earthworks, biodiversity and commercial vehicle parking.

“Members commented that the design offered good green space, landscaping, affordable housing and community benefits.”

“Members discussed separation distances between properties, property design (chimneys and three storey designs in relation to whether it was in keeping with the area), how earthworks would affect local residents with septic tanks, BNG in certain areas and prohibition of overnight parking for commercial vehicles.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee granted permission for the reasons and policies in the report, adding conditions about planting, chimneys and biodiversity enhancement.

“Boundary conditions to include understorey planting adjacent to the MUGA to improve BNG, • Include chimneys as part of the design to be more in keeping with the local area, • Prior to commencement of the development (excepting any site clearance or groundworks) a strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing that detailed how biodiversity enhancement can be achieved alongside the landscape implementation which should include: - Details of the habitat creations and…”

“That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.”

Minutes