'Unsustainable' plan for 150 new homes near Stafford rejected
A councillor who called in the application said the development would be inappropriate in scale and in an inappropriate location that risked pedestrian accidents
Councillors have turned down proposals to build 150 new homes on the edge of a village near Stafford – but the decision will now be referred to the Government.
A new national planning direction that came into force earlier this year means that any refusals of applications for 150 or more houses or flats must go to the Secretary of State.
This rule applies to plans for a housing development on land off Green Road, Weston, that was considered by Stafford Borough Council’s planning committee on Wednesday (October 28). The application had been recommended for approval by council officers, but planning committee members voted to refuse permission on the grounds of loss of agricultural land and building density.
Stafford Borough Council received 49 objections to the application and Weston with Gayton Parish Council also raised concerns about adequacy of local public transport, road safety and flood risk. It added that Westonhas lost its shop, Post Office and health services.
Councillor Frances Beatty called in the application for consideration by the planning committee. She said the proposed development was inappropriate in scale, in an inappropriate location that risked pedestrian accidents and would place pressure on local schools.
Hilary Hart, vice chair of Weston with Gayton Parish Council, spoke against the application at Wednesday’s meeting. She said: “Weston with Gayton Parish Council strongly objects to this application for 150 dwellings, on a site of which 95 per cent is best and most versatile agricultural land.
“This unsustainable proposal conflicts with the Plan for Stafford Borough and the NPPF [National Planning Policy Framework]. Adding 150 homes would increase Weston’s housing stock by 32.4 per cent.
“With the creation of a new neighbourhood separated from the historic village core, the development would erode the rural character, identity and community cohesion of Weston. The site itself is outside the settlement boundary.”


Myles Wild-Smith, who spoke on behalf of applicant Richborough, said: “The National Planning Policy Framework has changed significantly in recent years, and through those revisions the Government has placed a renewed emphasis on delivery of housing and strengthened policy support for sustainable development to help meet identified housing needs.
“As a result, the council is currently unable to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply.
“Substantial weight should be given to applications that contribute towards meeting these needs. This proposal would deliver up to 150 new homes, including 45 affordable homes, and that represents a meaningful contribution towards addressing the borough’s general and affordable housing needs.
“The site is immediately adjacent to Weston, a key service village with local services, community facilities and public transport connections. The proposal also includes supporting infrastructure, open space, landscaping, sustainable drainage measures and financial contributions through a Section 106 agreement.”
Committee member Councillor Ann Edgeller said: “We are decimating our villages. Here we are with a village with no doctor or shop, it’s so wrong we are building so many houses in a village that has no facilities.”
But Councillor Andy McNaughton said the increase in residents could encourage a shop to reopen in the village. “It’s like the film Field of Dreams – build it and they will come,” he added.
Councillor Jill Hood, who also spoke in support of the application, highlighted the new bus service that started in September, operating between Stone and Rugeley and calling at Burston, Weston, Hixon, Great Haywood and Colwich.
“It is not in isolated countryside,” she said. “It’s located next to the village, representing a logical extension to Weston.”
But just three councillors voted in favour of approving the application. A second vote, which was taken after Councillor Scott Spencer put forward reasons for refusal, resulted in eight votes to reject the proposals.
Comment Guidelines
Iconic Media encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.