The consultation period has now closed. Keep in touch for the latest news.

8 Top Tips!

  1. Make your statement personal, tell them how you feel about the impact this development with have on you, your family and the Village.
  2. Bare in mind, that if this goes ahead, the public footpaths across the field will be closed for at least two years, there will be huge disruption due to construction traffic, which all the village will feel, and then there will be as many as 200 new car movements a day through Brightholmlee lane and Don Avenue forever.
  3. Use the email address sheffieldplan@sheffield.gov.uk to send your responses in as quickly as possible. The deadline is Friday 11th July.
  4. Read the information below! It’s important that you speak the language of the planners within your response. Use your head and well as your heart.
  5. You can download documents from this website and attach them to your objection.
  6. Everyone in your household (including children) are allowed to make a response
  7. Don’t put all the names on one email (because this will only count as one objection, send in a different email for every household member.
  8. Use the documents and advice on this website to help you form a comprehensive response.

The consultation period has now closed

  1. Email the Council and object to the plan, but once again, make sure you read the advice below before you do so. Here’s the email address sheffieldplan@sheffield.gov.uk.
  2. You can also send a letter to the Council, objecting to the plan, but read the advice below first! Here’s the postal address: Strategic Planning Team, Planning Service, 5th Floor, Howden House, Sheffield S1 2SH.

Important Advice for Villagers (Must Read)

Our horse field is called NWS31 in the Sheffield Plan. It’s important you call it that in your response, so the Government Inspectors know what area you are talking about.

It’s important that you understand that the Government inspectors will be “scoring” all responses on just TWO POINTS. 1. Is the proposed development legal? and 2. is it sound? For your response to be an effective as it can be, you need to answer those two questions. The information on the rest of this page tells you how to do that.

An in addition, this website also contains a wealth of information that you can copy and quote in your responses. Check out the RESOURCES section when you’ve read the important material below.

Is Your Argument That the Plan Is NOT SOUND or NOT LEGAL? Here’s how to tell…
TIP – If you’d rather print this off and read, then here’s a PDF of this advice.

NOT SOUND = The plan doesn’t make sense

This could be points like…

  • There are better sites elsewhere that weren’t chosen.
  • The site is too difficult to build on (e.g. steep, flood risk, poor access).
  • It would harm nature, heritage or health and no good reason is given.
  • The numbers don’t work (e.g. not enough houses actually fit, or it’s too expensive to build).
  • It doesn’t match national planning policy (like protecting countryside or making places healthier).

Think of this as saying “This plan is flawed, unworkable, or bad for the community.”

NOT LEGAL = The plan breaks the rules

You could point out the plan goes against national laws or policies like…

  • Flood risk rules
  • Wildlife protection laws
  • Heritage protection laws
  • Equality law
  • Environment act

Think of this as “This plan shouldn’t even be allowed under the law.”

The arguments we’ve made categorised:

The council’s planning inspectors are looking for arguments that the housing development: 

  1. Isn’t sound
  2. Isn’t legal

So we’ve organised all the arguments we’ve collected into the two categories put forward by the council. 

Please feel free to make your own arguments and gather your own evidence including your personal thoughts, photographs and experiences. We hope this helps you understand whether your argument is against the soundness of the plan, or its legality.

WHY THIS PLAN IS NOT SOUND

Under national planning rules, a site like this can only be included if it’s shown to be reasonable, deliverable, and in line with national policy. But the plan to build on The Horsefield fails on all of these counts.

  1. Better options exist.

There are bigger, better, and easier places to build across Sheffield, including brownfield land and less sensitive greenfield areas. Choosing this site makes no sense when we already have other options that won’t cause as much harm.

2. The numbers don’t add up

The Council says 103 homes could be built, but once you take into account:

  • Flood zones
  • Wildlife areas
  • Steep slopes
  • Buffer zones around trees, rivers and hedgerows
     …you’re realistically looking at 30–40 houses max. Is that worth all the damage?

3. It won’t be affordable

Developers have to make at least 50% of the homes “affordable” to meet the Green Belt rules. But based on local prices and building costs, they’d lose money on every affordable home built here. The site is not financially viable. 

4.  It takes so much away from us

  • The new housing estate would destroy one of the only natural green spaces we can all access on foot. 
  • Wildlife corridors and ancient woodland would be disrupted. 
  • The council’s planning inspector has acknowledged that the development would harm Glen Howe Park, a heritage asset. 

Under planning rules, any damage to heritage or ecology must be clearly justified. That hasn’t happened.

5. No access, no amenities, no plan

The council has already admitted that the infrastructure in our area is poor. 

The planning inspector noted that the council also have no plans to improve infrastructure, and even though verbal promises have been made, there has been no plan or budget.

Access to public transport is poor, which means more cars. 

An access road would need to be built.

WHY THIS PLAN IS NOT LEGAL

Under the law, a housing plan must follow national policies and legal duties. But this one fails several key tests.

1.  It breaks flood protection law

This site sits right next to a functional floodplain and a major flood defence project the Council itself is spending £53 million on. Putting homes here risks undoing that investment and may breach the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, which requires councils to avoid increasing flood risk.

2. It ignores wildlife laws

Not only have many of you reported the beautiful wildlife you enjoy on The Horsefield, we know that there are special protection laws for hedgerows, rivers and rare species. 

According to the NPPF, the developers would need to prove that not only would their development not harm the nearby rivers, hedgerows and rare species such as bats. But they would need to increase “biodiversity” (wildlife, plants, nature) by 10%. More than a little tricky, we believe! 

Environment Act 2021 | National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

3.  It goes against heritage protection rules

Glen Howe Park is a designated heritage asset, and the Council admits the plan may harm its setting. Under national law and the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, any harm must be backed by clear and convincing justification. The Council has not provided that.

4. It may breach the Equality Act

Our village has a higher than average amount of people who are older, disabled, or unwell, and the Horse Field as their accessible green space. 

Removing it without replacing it may disproportionately harm vulnerable groups, which would breach the Equality Act 2010.

“Planning decisions must consider how policies affect those with protected characteristics.”
 — Equality Act 2010, Public Sector Equality Duty

Don’t forget to check out the Resources we have created to help you with your responses. You can copy and quote any of them that help your argument. Here’s the link to our RESOURCES SECTION