Plan to build almost 50 homes given green light despite pleas to save wildlife corridor

Permission has been given to build 47 homes on land in Yorkshire despite protests over the effect it will have on a wildlife corridor.

The proposal by Keepmoat Homes to build a four-storey block of 16 apartments plus 31 houses on land at the junction of Furnace Lane and Junction Road, Woodhouse was approved on Tuesday (Mar 10) by Sheffield Council’s planning and highways committee.

The decision was delayed by a month from the committee’s February meeting when local resident Jennifer Turton pointed out that a previous refusal of permission for housing on the land in 2008 had not been considered by planning officials.

Ms Turton and her father James both spoke against the plan at the meeting. An 86-signature petition and 38 individual objections were made to the council.

An illustration from Keepmoat Homes showing the type of house design planned for a site at Furnace Lane, Woodhouse, Sheffieldplaceholder image
An illustration from Keepmoat Homes showing the type of house design planned for a site at Furnace Lane, Woodhouse, Sheffield

The concerns raised included traffic, parking and road safety, pressure on local services, loss of green space and environmental impact and the design of the scheme.

The plan was also questioned by Sheffield and Rotherham Wildlife Trust, who have a nearby wildlife site at Woodhouse Washlands.

They said in a letter: “Given the location of the site between multiple designated wildlife sites and adjacent to the railway, it is highly likely that the site functions as a ‘stepping stone’ habitat supporting ecological connectivity across the area.”

Ms Turton told councillors: “The previous reasons for refusal in 2008 have not been overcome and they cannot be overcome because they refer to the status of the land itself.”

She said the land is on the semi-rural edge of Junction Road and has a high level of biodiversity and is an established green wildlife corridor linking up to other high-level habitats.

“It acts as the only green corridor through Woodhouse.”

Ms Turton said that when a wildlife survey was done the area was impenetrable so evidence will have been missed.

James Turton said he has been a resident there for over 35 years.

He said that the homes scheme would result in the net loss of more than 70% of the wildlife habitat, causing damage and the potential permanent loss of species.

“Agreement today would be to endorse a severe disruption of the only green corridor through Woodhouse.” He had seen bats, cuckoos and owls on the site and a neighbour had seen evidence of badgers.

Mr Turton said that a legal agreement by the developers to take actions to offset that loss elsewhere would not replace that green corridor.

He argued that the ’tilted balance’ in favour of housing development where a council cannot show a five-year supply of housing land should not be used as a “blank cheque” to allow an unacceptable scheme to go ahead.

Planning officer Sarah Hull said that the wildlife trust said a link for wildlife could be created on the neighbouring playing fields and they had commented but not actually objected to the plan.

She said that the reasons for the 2008 refusal were based on national policies that have now changed. The site was also bigger and the plan then was to build 87 homes.

The problem of a narrow road had been overcome by a proposal to widen Junction Road and create a footway along the frontage of the development.

Ms Hull said the plan lies in a designated housing area and the tilted balanace does apply.

Coun Mike Chaplin said: “We’re all sad to see the loss of green space, particularly when it’s close to our neighbourhood, but I do believe that this scheme has merits.

“It brings something that we’re very short of in this city, which is affordable housing.

“I would have been prepared to take a different view if it wasn’t affordable housing but I suspect even then we would not get the outcome we want because of the supply of land for housing with the tilted balance in play.”

He said the scheme was “more pleasing” than the 2008 one because of the different housing density.

News you can trust since 1754
Follow us
© 2026 Iconic Media Group Ltd. All rights reserved.Cookie SettingsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy notice