WOMBWELL’S three councillors have urged the planning board to reject an application which aims to build more than 200 homes on ‘safeguarded land’ - after the plans were earmarked for approval with the council currently unable to meet its five-year housing demand.
Councillors will meet on Tuesday to discuss the proposals to build up to 230 houses on Pit Lane.
However, it has sparked concern due to the land being marked in the Local Plan as ‘safeguarded land’, meaning it should not be built on until at least 2033.
Despite this, the proposals have been earmarked for approval due to the council’s lack of housing land supply.
A report states: “There is currently no evidence to suggest that development of this parcel would prejudice the delivery of the remainder of the safeguarded land allocation.
“Matters relating to internal layout, scale and design would be fully addressed at reserved matters stage.
“The two small parcels of land that lie outside the safeguarded land allocation fall within the urban fabric and the green belt.
“In summary, while the proposal conflicts with policy due to its location on safeguarded land, the council’s lack of a five-year housing supply and the resulting application of the NPPF tilted balance weigh substantially in favour of the development.
“The principle of development can be therefore supported in this instance, provided that all other matters do not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the residential development proposed.
“Barnsley’s 2023 Housing Delivery Test result stands at 84 per cent, triggering a 20 per cent buffer to the five-year housing land requirement.
“Furthermore, the council is also unable to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, with the most recently published position indicating a supply of only 2.9 years.”
The plans are subject to a section 106 agreement - cash set aside by local developers for local amenities - which would see almost £1m used for education, £172,500 for sustainable travel and £5,000 for biodiversity monitoring.
Ten per cent of the properties must also be ‘affordable’, according to the report.
However, councillors James Higginbottom, Robert Frost and Brenda Eastwood have urged the planning board to reject the application.
They said: “As local members, we have consistently expressed our clear opposition to the plans for outline planning permission on the land at Pit Lane.
“We have engaged with the local community who have also expressed a clear and consistent view in opposition to these proposals, including informally to us as local councillors and formally through the submission of objections during the planning consultation process.
“The land at Pit Lane was identified in the Local Plan as safeguarded for the duration of the plan period.
“It is our considered view that the development of safeguarded sites during the Local Plan period risks undermining the Barnsley Local Plan as a whole, and the objectives of plan-led development more generally.
“Second, we have concerns relating to the access road off Pit Lane, especially along the left-hand side boundary that abuts the Barley Sheaf pub.
“The difference in land levels and existing carriageway widths at this pinch point risk creating a substantial bottleneck for vehicle access and egress from the site.
“Third, we have clear concerns regarding road safety, particularly on the proposals for an access road off Pit Lane.
“The nature of the proposals would substantially increase vehicle numbers into the junction with Aldham House Lane, Summer Lane and Windmill Road - sites which are already raised with us as ward members in relation to speeding vehicles.
“Fourth, and finally, there is already anecdotal evidence of flood risk both on the site itself during periods of heavy rainfall and onto Pit Lane which struggles to cope at present with run-off from the adjacent fields.
“We believe that careful consideration to water management and flood risk should be paramount to this scheme and we have not yet received sufficient reassurance that this can be managed within existing plans.”
