The council have made a few claims in their own suitability assessment of NWS31 (The Horsefield, to you and I). So we decided to conduct our own suitability assessment with a property construction owner. 

NWS31 Suitabilty Assessment – CommentsDownload

The council have made a few claims in their own suitability assessment of NWS31 (The Horsefield, to you and I). So we decided to conduct our own suitability assessment with a property construction owner. 

He found huge problems that have been overlooked, or downplayed. Here’s a clear breakdown…

Transport – Inadequate

What the Council Says:

  • Site is over 1,200m from core public transport.
  • Beyond 400m of any planned bus or tram route.

What the Wharncliffe Side developer says:

  • The 57/57a bus is the only remaining route, and runs hourly on weekdays and every 2 hours on Sundays.
  • Supertram Link SL1 & SL1a have been removed.
  • If a tram/train is built, Wharncliffe Side will likely be bypassed.
  • Deepcar = 55-minute walk. Oughtibridge = 30-minute walk.
  • No active cycle network nearby.

Services – Underfunded

What the Council Says:

  • Site is near 4 types of local facilities.
  • Schools have surplus places.

What the Wharncliffe Side developer says:

  • Only a part-time post office/shop, two pubs, a chapel and takeaway exist in the village.
  • No GP, no pharmacy, no dentist, no café.
  • Nearest shop (Oughtibridge) is 1.8km away.
  • School places may disappear fast as 761 new homes already approved nearby (Deepcar, Oughtibridge Mill, Cloverleaf Court).

Nature – at risk

What the Council Says:

  • “Site is likely to have significant ecological value”-  but doesn’t act on it.
  • Recommends a 15m buffer near Glen Howe Park.

What the Wharncliffe Side developer says:

  • The field is a key part of a wildlife corridor connecting:
    • Glen Howe Park (a Local Wildlife Site)
    • Tinker Brook
    • River Don
      Wharncliffe Woods
  • Home to bats, hedgehogs (endangered), badgers, deer, frogs, foxes, owls. As well as 30+ bird species, including housemartins, curlews, warblers, herons, song thrushes.

Open space – this IS our open space

What the Council Says:

  • “No existing open space on site.”
  • “Plenty of open space nearby.”

What the Wharncliffe Side developer says:

This is our open space. The village has no parks or usable fields, most are private farmland or dense woodland. The playground is often too waterlogged to use. 

The field meets every requirement to be a Local Green Space, even if not yet designated.
Losing this space would leave Wharncliffe Side with nowhere flat, open, and wild for children, nature, or community use.

Green space requirements:
Be reasonably close to the community it serves and be demonstrably special to the community it serves because of things like:

  • Beauty 
  • Historic significance 
  • Recreational value 
  • Tranquillity 
  • Richness of wildlife 
  • Be local in character and not an extensive tract of land. 

Density and housing number – Doesn’t add up

What the Council Says:

  • 103 homes over 3.42 hectares = about 30 homes per hectare.

What the Wharncliffe Side developer says:

  • Once you account for:
    • 15m wildlife buffer
    • Floodplain areas
    • Retained footpaths
      Green space
    • Heritage protection

The real usable area is around half → closer to 34 homes, not 103. The site isn’t big enough for 103 houses. The plan relies on ignoring this.

Affordable homes – Misleading Claim

What the Council Says:

  • “Up to 45% affordable housing.”

What the Wharncliffe Side developer says:

  • Green Belt Golden Rules require 50%.
  • A proper cost analysis shows each affordable house would lose £30,000+. 
  • Developers will likely remove this requirement later, as they did at Oughtibridge Mill.

Heritage – Harmed

What the Council Says:

  • “Possible harm” to heritage assets. Recommends following a Heritage Impact Assessment.

What the Wharncliffe Side developer says:

  • Glen Howe Park is a designated heritage site.
  • Paragraphs 202–221 of the NPPF (2024) require “clear and convincing justification for harm”. Is 34 unaffordable houses justification to harm this heritage asset?

Flooding – Likely

What the Council Says:

The council admits parts of the field are functional floodplain. These areas will need to be left undeveloped.

What the Wharncliffe Side developer says:

No clarity yet on how this will affect drainage or development layout.

To wrap it up – The councils own document says this site needs ecology studies, heritage mitigation, flood planning, road contributions and more. 

But they promise these houses will also be affordable. 

None of these issues have been planned for or addressed, but the site’s still been included in the Sheffield 2025 Housing Plan.

And here is the original document produced by Sheffield City Council

Site NWS31 – SCC Suitability AssessmentDownload