23/09/2026
🏡 WHY I OBJECT TO PLANNING APPLICATION 2026/0640
As a councillor, I have a responsibility to be objective when considering planning applications, while also standing up for fellow residents and addressing their concerns.
The Green Belt was established through the Town and Country Planning Act 1947, with the policy developed to prevent urban sprawl and the merging of towns and villages.
For this reason, and the reasons I have detailed below, I have objected to the proposed development of 270 dwellings on Green Belt land between Hemingfield and Jump.
—
While I recognise the need for new housing, I do not believe this proposal represents sustainable development and I have significant concerns regarding its impact on local infrastructure, the Green Belt, the character of the area, highway safety, and the cumulative effect of housing growth already approved nearby.
🌳 The Coalescence of Settlements:
One of the primary purposes of the Green Belt is to prevent neighbouring settlements from merging into one another. The land between Hemingfield and Jump provides an important buffer that helps maintain the separate identities and character of both communities.
The proposed development would significantly reduce this separation and create the perception of a continuous built-up area between the two villages. Residents are understandably concerned that this would represent a major step towards the gradual coalescence of Hemingfield and Jump, fundamentally changing the character of both settlements.
There are also concerns that the reduction of Green Belt between Hemingfield, Wombwell and Elsecar would contribute to urban sprawl and set a precedent for the release of further protected land in the future. Once Green Belt land is lost, it is almost impossible to restore, and this proposal would result in a permanent and irreversible change to the landscape.
📈 Cumulative Impact of Housing Growth:
The proposal cannot be viewed in isolation.
Once all phases of the approved Hemingfield Road development are complete, approximately 430 new homes will have been delivered in Hemingfield. If this latest application is approved, the combined total would be around 700 additional properties across Hemingfield and Jump.
This represents a substantial increase in the local housing stock in a relatively short period of time and raises serious questions about whether adequate infrastructure is available to support such growth.
The application does not appear to demonstrate convincingly that existing services and facilities have sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional demand generated by hundreds of new households.
🏫 Pressure on Local Infrastructure:
Residents have repeatedly raised concerns regarding the ability of local infrastructure to cope with further large-scale development.
Particular concerns include:
- Increased pressure on already busy local roads.
- Additional demand on local primary and secondary schools.
- Pressure on GP surgeries and healthcare services.
- Increased demand on public services and community facilities.
- The adequacy of drainage infrastructure to support significant additional development.
Development should be supported by the infrastructure communities need. It is not reasonable to continually increase housing numbers without providing clear evidence that roads, schools, healthcare services and utilities can accommodate that growth.
⚠️ Highway Safety Concerns
The proposed single access point onto Cemetery Road raises particular concerns.
Residents have highlighted existing issues relating to vehicle speeds, traffic volumes and highway safety in the area. Introducing traffic associated with 270 additional homes through a single access point has the potential to worsen these existing problems.
A full assessment should be undertaken to demonstrate that the local highway network can safely accommodate the increase in vehicle movements generated by the development.
💦 Flood Risk and Drainage
Questions remain regarding drainage capacity and the potential impact of the development on flood risk.
Parts of the wider area have experienced flooding in the past, and it is therefore essential that the council is fully satisfied that existing drainage systems have sufficient capacity and that the development will not increase flood risk for existing residents.
Given increasing pressures from extreme weather events, drainage considerations should be afforded significant weight.
🦉 Impact on Wildlife and Biodiversity
The application site currently provides open green space and habitat opportunities for wildlife.
Residents have expressed concerns regarding the potential loss of habitats and the impact on biodiversity. Any proposal of this scale should clearly demonstrate how biodiversity will not only be protected but meaningfully enhanced, particularly given the loss of undeveloped Green Belt land.
🚶🏻Pedestrian Access Concerns
In addition, it appears from the submitted plans that a pedestrian entrance/exit is proposed at the bottom of the site onto what appears to be a private road.
This raises a number of questions regarding the suitability, ownership, maintenance and lawful use of that access point. Clarification should be sought regarding whether appropriate rights of access exist and what impact increased pedestrian movements may have on neighbouring properties and road users.
💡 Conclusion
For the reasons set out above, I believe this application would result in the unacceptable loss of Green Belt land, contribute to the merging of neighbouring settlements, place further pressure on already stretched infrastructure, create highway safety concerns, and potentially impact drainage, flood risk, wildlife and biodiversity.
I would ask that these concerns be thoroughly investigated and given substantial weight during the determination process.
