BARNSLEY Council’s planning board is set to refuse plans for more than 200 homes in Carlton - after more than 30 letters of objection were submitted by local residents.
The plans to build the 215 houses north of Shaw Lane will be discussed by councillors on Tuesday but it’s anticipated that the application will be knocked back.
The site consists of a 7.57-hectare area of land that forms part of MU3 and the Carlton Masterplan Framework.
This parcel of the Carlton masterplan site is located to the north of Shaw Lane and is currently used as agricultural land with areas of marshland.
The surrounding area mainly consists of other fields and undeveloped land to the north and south that are also the subject of Local Plan allocation MU3.
That includes the former Carlton Colliery immediately opposite to the south of the site.
A report to be coonsodered by the planning board says: “There are a small number of residential properties positioned opposite to the south and a greater number further along Shaw Lane to the west.
“The application is in outline form with all matters reserved except for means of access.
“The proposal consists of an indicative number of 215 dwellings with associated car parking, garages, access, landscaping, open space and drainage provision.
“Vehicular access to the site is proposed from Shaw Lane to the south.
“It is proposed that this access would allow the site to come forward independently from the rest of the MU3 allocation.
“The access and internal road layout is proposed to provide access into the wider allocation.”
The report adds that the number of children coming to the area would increase by almost 80 - and the local schools currently do not have enough capacity
Therefore developers would have to spend more than £1.2m on education to ensure that the plans are deemed acceptable.
“The secondary school for this area - Outwood Academy Carlton - will not have sufficient school places to accommodate this development and the primary phase is also under pressure.
“The pupil yield from this development will require an additional one and a half form entry in primary and an additional form at secondary.”
A total of 50 letters were received following consultation, 32 of which were objecting to the plans.
The main issues involved inadequate access, loss of green space, negative impact on local wildlife and not enough facilities to cope with the additional residents.
The report added: “The plans fail to include a small local shop for the benefit of the local community in this part of the site which is a requirement of the Masterplan Framework.
“The proposals also fall short on achieving the minimum housing density figures required by the Masterplan.
“Again, the absence of a firm commitment to comply with the housing densities in the masterplan is unacceptable from a Local Plan housing delivery perspective.
“Furthermore, the applicant has not demonstrated that foot and cycle links provide appropriate levels of sustainable access to and from the site.
“The links shown to the TPT cannot be fully achieved without land outside the applicants control and walk distances to public transport far exceed the 400m walk distance guidelines.
“The proposed works would give rise to road safety concerns in their own right.”
Campaign group ‘Stop MU2/MU3’ has long been attempting to stop these plans - and they are delighted that they’re set to be rejected.
A spokesperson told the Chronicle: “The group are elated with the news that this inappropriate and potentially damaging development is set to be refused by the council.
“We stand by our objections and the statements we have made from the start about the location of this development.
“This parcel of land should be dropped from the masterplan and the land used for biodiversity friendly farming.
“The site of special scientific interest (SSSI) should not be bordered by development on any sides.
“This development is only 35m away from the SSSI and 45m from the canal, slicing the historic wildlife corridor from the TPT in two.
“The group will continue to fight for green spaces and wildlife in our area until the council do the responsible thing, and rethink the land allocations within the Carlton masterplan.”
