Controversial housing plan approved despite widespread concerns

The site, off Pit Lane, was in the sights of Barnsley Council for housing - but only after 2033 at the earliest, a status called ‘safeguarded’ land. However, other sites earmarked for immediate development in the last few years have not seen progress - meaning Barnsley Council has fallen behind Government expectations. In practice, that limits the opportunities for the council to reject applications to develop such sites. A ‘safeguarded’ site at Hemingfield rejected for development recently by the council won permission on appeal - leaving the council with what is understood to be a six figure bill for costs. Councillors were told fewer houses had been built that the council had anticipated under its Local Plan, a blueprint dating from 2019 which highlighted major sites deemed appropriate for housing. Officials said: “We have no had housing delivered in line with what we thought was coming forward. Global matters have played a part. They included the pandemic, inflation and building material shortages. The Pit Lane site was granted permission for around 230 new homes, and changes to the junction with Aldham House Lane, with details of the site design to be confirmed later. Councillors who made the decision had been repeatedly warned by planning officials that an appeal inspector would “give great weight to the fact there is a housing need,” and “that is something we have to consider with this application.” Council planners recommended the application should be approved, though the area’s three councillors and some residents raised objections. Resident Heather Bamford spoke at the meeting and raised concerns over the fact the land was ‘safeguarded’, so should be protected from development at present; unacceptable highways implications from increased traffic; the prospect of a higher flooding risk from ‘run off’ water caused by hard surfacing on the development. Cllr Nicola Sumner said she “had concerns” the site was safeguarded land and questioned what was happening to bring forward other alternative developments. “I do feel to some extent that our hands are tied. Developers see they have a right of appeal. I really am in two minds about it.” Cllr Sumner was among two to vote against approval.