Unresolved row over gravel prompts U-turn in officer support for 97-home development

COUNCIL OFFICERS who backed plans to build 97 homes on open land in Barnsley are now advising councillors to reject the scheme after a long-running dispute with developers could not be resolved.

Gleeson Homes wants to build the houses at Bolton on Dearne in what would be the third phase of a large housing development.

Although the firm and the council are in agreement about large-scale cash contributions to cover the need for new primary school places, the impact on public open areas and the need for affordable housing, the deal could come unstuck in a dispute over the way driveways to the new homes are constructed and what the council claims is a history of the company breaching previous planning conditions.

A decision had been due to be made by Barnsley Council’s planning board in May over the site, off Lowfield Road, but it was put off until next week’s meeting to allow planning officials to explore whether the company’s record of planning breaches, and its “stated intention” to appeal against conditions imposed on the current application, were enough to warrant a refusal.

That has resulted in council officials reversing their original advice to approve the scheme, now telling councillors they believe it should be rejected.

The problem surrounds Gleeson Homes desire to use loose chippings on driveways to new homes, something Barnsley Council will not accept because it allows chippings to spill onto the carriageway and weeds to grow through the surface.

A report to be considered before a decision is made on Tuesday states there is a “current dispute between officers and the applicant concerning the visual amenity and highway safety implications of the use of gravel driveways.

“This matter has been subject to thorough testing through the appeal process with the applicant losing five appeals last year specifically related to the unacceptability of loose aggregate on drives.”

An alternative suggested by the developer using two rows of paving slabs was branded unacceptable by officers.

Elements of the scheme which are not in dispute include a £250,000 payment towards providing affordable housing on a site elsewhere.