Upload a photo Upload a video Upload an mp3 Upload an event


Houses to be built in Dodworth

Tuesday August 2 2016

Councillors on the planning committee have approved the plans Councillors on the planning committee have approved the plans

PLANS to build up to 36 houses in Dodworth have been approved by the council - despite objections from locals.

Calver Close resident Mick West says the plan for the houses - which will be built off Smithy Wood Lane -  threatens to make Dodworth and Gilroyd 'one big housing estate'.

But councillors said last week that there were no valid reasons to refuse the it on planning grounds.

Leave a comment
comments powered by Disqus
30 Showing 30 comments

Reply Posted by Beef on Tuesday August 2 2016 at 15:16
Its a **** oil gilroyd full of scruffs and druggies

Reply Posted by Gavelar on Tuesday August 2 2016 at 17:05
How many getting built in Silkstone, High Hoyland and Cawthorne in the next 10 years?

Ah yes 0 planned by the council.

Reply Posted by Dozzer on Thursday August 4 2016 at 10:23
I completely agree Barnsley council cant even get the bin collection sorted properly so I dont have faith in the more complex job of planning new housing estates. There seems very limited infrastructure (docs n school etc) in Gilroyd and Dodworth to cope with all these new residents.

Reply Posted by TANYA on Tuesday August 2 2016 at 21:55
ok gavelar, we get it.. you hate Barnsley council they can do nothing right in your eyes. give it a rest.

Reply Posted by Gavelar on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 10:33
hate is a strong word, I would probably use the words inept and I only really think of the upper echelons of the management chain.

As in the planning department are "inept" or the leadership of the planning department is "inept"

My comment was more aimed at the current version of the local plan where pretty much any scrap of greenspace is open to building regardless of suitability or whether the area infrastructure can support it. Apart from the areas above which are amongst the most affluent in barnsley and have the most greenspace to offer they are off limits. Smacks of cronysim swaying the planning department.

If you want more examples of how I think the leadership of BMBC is inept please let me know :)

Reply Posted by dean on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 12:36
So many buzzwords... You swallow the govt's guidance on how to get people talking?

FYI - No-one cares what you think, actions make a difference not your opinion.

Reply Posted by Gavelar on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 13:37
remind me which buzzwords did I use please? I think it was just english.

Would you prefer buzz speak.

FYI I don't care what you think I suppose you are out with your shotgun at protests? I forgot we live in the american deep south.


Reply Posted by Dave G on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 14:33
Bloody hell Gavelar .. that brought out the hooray Henry, and Henriettas didn't it ? Think you hit a very raw nerve there ..

Reply Posted by Dean on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 15:07
Greenspace, area infrastructure, cronyism. I'd prefer you to not say anything rather than talk about how you feel the leaders of our council are inept. As I said, if the council is inept, do something, dont sit there keyboard warrior style telling everyone how you think the game should be played. Apply for a position working there, sign up for local elections do SOMETHING!

Or dont... as you never do...

You obviously do care what I think, you replied.

Reply Posted by Gavelar on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 18:25
Ha Ha know me do you? You have no idea what I'm up to.

Greenspace, Infrastructure, cornyism - all words in the dictionary. I regret calling you a tool, a tool is useful.

You are right I do care what you think your comments affect me deeply, I feel sad, please don't write me another scathing reply.

Reply Posted by Lamb on Tuesday August 2 2016 at 23:04
Lol where is Barnsley is not full of Scruffs and druggies?

Reply Posted by Peter Austin on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 14:40
Monk Bretton isn't full of scruffs and druggies.

Reply Posted by Lamb on Tuesday August 2 2016 at 23:05

Reply Posted by Billy handbag on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 10:15
Chicken n chips n a breezers mix!! DODWORTH 4 LIFE

Reply Posted by Shukky on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 13:05
That's only 36, what about the other 221 planned on the green belt behind ware ham grove? At present it takes 3 weeks to get a Dr's appointment, what will it be when we have approx 800 -1000 more people, then the additional traffic, not enough school places and nowhere for these kids to play as they are living on the playing fields.

Reply Posted by TANYA on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 21:56
I wouldn't mind gavelar but every time the headline post realates to anything to do with Barnsley council you are straight in like a rat up a drainpipe.as soon as I saw the headline I new you would have some pearls of wisdom for us all. you are so predictable an so boring.

Reply Posted by Gavelar on Wednesday August 3 2016 at 23:15
funny there were 4 stories on here last week regarding our fantastic efficient council. i commented on one of them n support of the new library. Put the wine down and find the caps lock.

Reply Posted by Steven James on Thursday August 4 2016 at 13:27
I'll tell you why TANYA, The Labour CLOWNS have been in power in Barnsley for almost a CENTURY and please explain to me exactly what said Labour CLOWNS have achieved during this almost century long tortuous tenure?


19000 Houses to be built before 2030, where do you think these houses are going to go?

Yup you guessed it our PRECIOUS GREEN BELT.

Now take those rose coloured glasses off and STOP voting the Labour CLOWNS in just because your father and his father before him voted for said Labour CLOWNS!

Reply Posted by Tom on Thursday August 4 2016 at 15:51
Even old pits have managed to become greenbelt, and the greenbelt across the UK has doubled in size, 3/4s of Barnsley is now greenbelt. The greenbelt does not need protecting from development and people, the people need protecting from the greenbelt.

Young people are being forced into slum housing and having to rent rooms smaller than prison cells, whilst we have old people rattling around in large family homes, with more money than sense and have too much time on their hands, who then protest against the building of new housing which would benefit others who desperately need it. Yet they themselves live in generously sized homes, that were built upon green spaces once upon a time.

Perhaps we should measure the amount of (housing) floor space per person, and tax those who consume more than the average, that way, we limit development and punish those who hog the housing.

It is completely unjust that some are forced to subsist in tiny rooms at great cost, and to add insult to injury, they have to pay taxes to subsidise others, who live in large homes and object to others being able to even have the chance to live in modestly sized homes.

Reply Posted by Gavelar on Friday August 5 2016 at 11:01
Good points Tom but the new housing isn't being aimed at young people on a budget. Take my village of Mapplewell for example, we have about 800 odd houses being built within a mile of the village,darton barugh green have sizaeble developments too.

Lavender fold on North Gawbers pit site is marketing their average priced house at 240k for a 4 bed. All are detached so they aren't trying to market them to young people or even local people the average wage in Barnsley wouldn't pay the mortgage. The sole aim of these properties are to lure people from leeds and sheffield into living on a commuter belt. The developers are just trying to get the maximum per house footprint.

As for the amount of green belt Mapplewell barely has any left now - it's pretty much entirely been put on the local plan which makes me sad.

What makes me protest at the amount of development which I think is excessive for the area is that there will be no new doctors, roads, shops, amenities or schools to support the growth, they aren't on the plan. Hill brow has a 3 week waiting list now and they are a good doctors.

It's not been evenly distributed either, The more affluent areas of Barnsley don't get added to the local plan - the only reason I can think of is because the people that live there have more clout in the council than joe bloggs so therefore those areas aren't even considered.

Reply Posted by Anon on Saturday August 6 2016 at 13:43
@Steven James
Why are you getting so het up about 'our precious green belt'? Even former pit muck stacks are 'green belt' now. There is loads of it.Please tell me what you do to enjoy this precious green belt! Go and watch 12 year olds driving quad bikes on it? Have a drive in your CLOWN car with your 2 or 3 mates so you can have a look at our precious green belt and moan about the Council?

Reply Posted by Stacey on Thursday August 4 2016 at 12:11
Why on earth shouldn't there be 36 houses built off Smithy Wood Lane? Why should it just stay a space for people to look at? More important, we need central government to spend more on schools and the NHS so people in these 36 houses can get a school place and a doctors appointment. The country isn't broke, there is the money, but a government that wants to run down education and health to the point of privatisation will not release it. Tories out!

Reply Posted by TANYA on Thursday August 4 2016 at 22:13
there you go again gavelar somebody doesn't have the same opinion as you so you resort to insults. suggesting I put down the wine and find the caps lock. just like you did earlier this week when you called somebody a tool. But this time you have Steven James as back up. problem is I don't drink so you are wrong there gavelar. As for steven james sorry but you are wrong as well I don't vote labour and my farther doesn't either. Mr james you say the houses should not be built ON OUR PRECIOUS GREEN BELT and I agree, but you don't come up with the all important answer WERE THEY SHOULD BE BUILT. if you had the answer to that you would probably be on Barnsley council.

Reply Posted by Gavelar on Friday August 5 2016 at 10:19
Quote, "you are so predictable and so boring" your opening shot at me TANYA - people in glass houses and all that.

And it is "where" not "were".

I think the houses should be built in Hoylandswaine, Cawthorne and Silkstone my first point before I was rudely trolled by you and that other person.

But for some reason those areas have some magical preservation order around them that for seome reason means no houses can be considered for planning there hence no inclusion on the local plan.

Reply Posted by Stacey on Friday August 5 2016 at 14:44
What is this magical 'green belt' obsession that has to be preserved at all costs? Some of the people who fear building housing on the green belt are the same super brains who think that 'our tiny island' is 'full.' And that Barnsley is 'full.' We need more affordable housing, more school places, more nurses and doctors, more facilities for care of the elderly. We are a rich nation, led at central government level by blinkered public school products or corrupt war mongers who would sooner commit to nuclear weapons than to schools and health. Tories out!

And it's 'some' not 'seome.'

Reply Posted by Gavelar on Friday August 5 2016 at 17:38
Oh dear oh dear stacey have you even viewed the plans?

If so you would know that:

1. They aren't affordable housing.
2. there are no plans for any new doctors

The tories had nothing to do with the plans.

I say go for building some affordable houses in Cawthorne they have loads of space.

Seome was obviously a typo, not an incorrect use of a word - let's not get too pedantic eh?

It's a

Reply Posted by Stacey on Saturday August 6 2016 at 12:33
Of course plans for a few houses would not include 'plans' for new GP surgeries!
Whether this would be in Gilroyd or Cawthorne or anywhere else that space exists.
Of course the Tories have nothing to do with BMBC's planning department but they have everything to do with cuts in spending on health and education; the wish to turn every school into an academy; and the apparent aim to privatise our NHS.
If housing is not affordable, given the homeless crisis, it is an outrage whether it is built in Gilroyd, Hoylandswaine or anywhere else in the country.

Reply Posted by Eve on Thursday August 4 2016 at 22:25
Peter Austin. Monk Bretton is overflowing with scruffs and druggies that's why the houses are so cheap there. I do find the most deluded people live but at least they are happy I suppose that's all that matters.

Reply Posted by TANYA on Friday August 5 2016 at 21:55
first of all thanks for the English lesson gavelar and you are right it is WHERE and not WERE but then again its SOME and not SEOME but lets not get too pedantic. my second point is I didn't ask you WHERE the houses should be built if you read my post the question was for steve james. you see I read your first post and you did say the houses should be built in Hoylandswaine ect.

Reply Posted by Aunt Hilda on Monday August 8 2016 at 06:19
First, can I say how nice it is that you are all helping each other with spelling and grammar. Very commendable and a shining example of a learning opportunity being utilised to the hilt.

Personally I would like to see brownfield sites being used for housing first. However it is inevitable that as the population grows we will have to build more housing on green sites. We need homes.