Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About six45ive

  • Rank
    Registered User

Personal Information

  • Location
    Hillsborough, Sheffield 6

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There is when a large part of what's being proposed will have such a major impact on large areas of the city. Historically this is one of the main reasons why Sheffield is the disjointed place it is; the crass result of being the test bed for many an architect or urban planner that wants to foist something new on the city and it's people. Hey, after all they're only Sheffielders - thick working class people who'll accept anything you'll throw at them that has the key words 'jobs' and 'regeneration' attached.
  2. Reading this government report, it's clear that Sheffield is, once again, being used as a testing ground to see what works and what doesn't for other, er............shall we say............more important cities - surreptitiously under the guise of regeneration. Page 25 of this document highlights Sheffield as the testing ground. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/551137/national-flood-resilience-review.pdf
  3. Ok. Cheers. Yes precisely. Don't forget that the June 2007 event came after one of the wettest winters on record and then there was intense heavy rain which caused heavy flooding in Barnsley during May further saturating the ground and then a similar intense system hit the area causing the devastation in Sheffield (and Barnsley again) on June 25th. Since then there has been extensive work to clear the rivers of debris and to increase the flow rate of the rivers to move the water away quicker as well as de-silting. For example, Malin Bridge where the Rivelin meets the Loxley, has had much of the river bed lowered by over a metre and water now flows freely under all the arches of the bridges rather than just one which was the case in 2007. Compare the two photos. The first taken just after the vegetation had been cleared but before the river bed had been scraped. http://www.sheffieldhistory.co.uk/forums/uploads/monthly_08_2009/post-1014-1251205405_thumb.jpg This one taken just after. You can clearly see how the bed level has dropped and the de-silting has created more capacity at the sides with a mill pond on the left revealed. http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/01/54/00/1540057_74b59fbc.jpg It's arguable that, if this had been the state of the rivers in 2007, then large parts of the city centre and the Lower Don Valley wouldn't have flooded to anywhere near the extent they did....and that's without any other defences being built in the meantime. A better and more nuanced management of all the reservoirs upstream combined with more tree planting further up the valleys and the re-creation of thousands of acres of peat bogs on the moors should make it a near impossibility that flooding on the scale of 2007 could ever happen again in Sheffield.
  4. Clearly it gets it from the rivers but you seemed to be implying that the reservoirs are there to supply water only when the river levels have got so low that you can't take water direct from the rivers anymore. Apologies if this wasn't what you were saying. Did you not read my last comment when I specifically stated this was not the case and asked why would spare capacity in the reservoir be needed in a dry spell? I also dealt with this in my last post to some extent. There is no reason why all of the city's reservoirs, when they've filled to within a metre of the brim after a dry summer, can't be held at that level under normal climatic conditions throughout the autumn, winter and spring. The city is in the very fortunate position that all the rivers flow west to east and we get most of our heavy rain from the west (the Atlantic). This means you can release excess water into the rivers well in advance of a storm coming and the water will be out in the Humber before the weather system arrives. Even during longer intense periods of rain, if you make sure you keep dropping the reservoir levels during any drier interlude then you're continually providing spare capacity............and on a level that makes the proposed dam building's water retention look insignificant. ---------- Post added 10-10-2016 at 17:51 ---------- Yes, so we already have an impressive and extensive system of flood defences sitting there already.
  5. The water treatment works don't get their supply from the rivers, they get it directly from the reservoirs, but even if what you said was correct, dropping the reservoir levels by 1 metre would increase the flow in the river over several days meaning there would be more water flowing into the treatment works. Where did you get the idea that the water treatment works gets its water directly from the rivers? ---------- Post added 10-10-2016 at 16:29 ---------- Also the idea obviously wouldn't be to reduce the reservoir level in dry weather. Why would anyone want to do that? It's about managing the reservoir level depending on the climatic conditions at the time and what's forecast in the near future - so if their is high confidence that there is a deep low pressure system that's due to hit the country in a weeks time and you have a relatively full reservoir then you can release a metre or two before the rains come to give that spare capacity.
  6. Also I don't understand your point about there being an issue regarding the water treatment work because a reservoir is 1 metre below it's capacity. A lot of the city's reservoirs are a lot more than 1 metre below capacity during dry spells in summer and the fact that water can be moved around between reservoirs makes this a non issue. ---------- Post added 10-10-2016 at 13:12 ---------- Approximately across the road from the bottom of Hagg Hill. It appears that the dam wall would come up to the street level.
  7. A lot of what you say deals with legalities regarding a private company such as Yorkshire Water but this should be the easiest of issues to overcome. All that's required is negotiation and joined up thinking by all parties involved and, if need be, a change in regulation to enable this simplest of solutions to come about. Also, your point about this not being a solution for all of Sheffield's main rivers is wrong. All of the rivers except the Sheaf are supplied by reservoir water upstream; a quick look on a map will highlight this quite starkly.
  8. Yes Eater Sundae. All of those things are incredibly serious concerns and they aren't costed in the £80 million fund as I understand it. That money is purely for building the structures, the clean up after a flood would have to come out of council coffers. The fundamental point here is that this is all unnecessary because we already have the engineering solutions in place further up the city's valleys. The important point to note in the letter I posted is that the bottom Rivelin reservoir only needs to be lowered 1 metre to take up the capacity of the two dams being proposed! This seems to be no more than an opportunistic and ill thought out approach to the fact that the government are throwing some money at the council and they have to find a way to spend it so.........hey, sod the consequences. This is entirely unnecessary across the city's valleys and will do way more damage than good when you bear in mind that the structures may never need to be used.
  9. This is a response to the proposals on the RVCG Facebook page. Pop over and give it a like to keep updated. "In response to your front page article on Wednesday and the comment included on page 11 by Cllr Bryan Lodge I feel it necessary to state that it was never the intention of The Rivelin Valley Conservation Group to be alarmist but simply to ensure that because the consultation was started in August when most people are on holiday that Sheffielders were fully acquainted with the facts. If the councillor had attended one of the consultation meetings and asked the pertinent questions our representatives did he would know that the computer model used by the Council's consultants indicated that in Rivelin's case the 2 impounding reservoirs would need to hold back a volume of water that would mean a depth of some 10 metres at the embankments, 80 metres wide and running back up the river and Nature trail for several hundred yards Holding back this pressure of water will involve the engineering construction of a full reservoir dam and with a safety element to ensure no overtopping this would mean an 11 metre embankment. This water would be held until the flood risk had subsided when it would be released gradually to allow for re-use. Should the Rivelin scheme proceed we are faced with a massive obstruction to people being able to walk freely up the most accessible easy-going countryside walk in the City, but with the safety hazard of a 10 metre deep unfenced reservoir. The impact on the landscape of these structures and the drowned debris strewn areas where the impounded water had been will be enormous. Although the scheme may be funded through government grant I would question whether the Council has any contingency plans for the subsequent maintenance of reservoir dams, the complicated sluices and their gates and the reinstatement of footpaths and retaining walls after each flood. The wildlife corridor so vital to the movement and interaction of the valley's wildlife would be severed by the dams and sluices and significant areas temporarily inundated by the impounded waters. The wildlife of a pennine river and its banksides is very special and unique to that particular habitat. To suggest days, if not weeks, of interrupting the flow and drowning of areas irrespective of nesting seasons for birds and small mammals, the sequence of insect development which is specific to different water conditions and the flowering times of our native flora is nothing short of criminal. There has to be an alternative to a complete obstruction of the river and Nature trail. Alternatives include better maintenance of the river systems, particularly at confluences and bridges, the repair of some of the existing mill dams, construction of new impounding dams which do not interrupt the river and footpath networks and a conversation with Yorkshire Water regarding the use of Rivelin reservoirs. The drawing down of the Lower Dam by 1 metre would more than compensate for the volume of the scheme being suggested and would have minimal impact on the supply to the treatment Works. The facts put together by our professional experts cannot be disputed by councillors and we hope Sheffielders will use the consultation process to make their views on the value of each affected valley known. The viability of alternative schemes does need to take full account of the Value, even if unquantifiable, of our ability to access and enjoy the wild and industrial heritage that makes Sheffield the unique City it is. Roger Kite M.B.E. Ex Chairman and currently Conservation Adviser to Rivelin Valley Conservation Group"
  10. If anyone in the Shiregreen,Firth Park or Wincobank area has lost a Rottweiller, please contact the caretakers house at Hinde House secondary school on Shiregreen Lane.
  11. Here's a video of part of the confrontation for those who haven't seen it. Just under 30 minutes long. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJifvqNtWgw
  12. I see a lot of confusion on this thread about what's ugly and what isn't. Will a building grow on me? (whatever that means). This video may be of help to some people. Hopefully it will clarify what conditions are objectively necessary for creating a more aesthetically pleasing built environment.
  13. Thanks for that link Longcol. The commentary of the article is pretty vacuous and lazy but hopefully most people are intelligent enough to get it from watching the video in its entirety. ---------- Post added 23-01-2016 at 16:40 ---------- I've changed the link in the OP so it should now take you to the video. Here it is again.
  14. Lol, that's strange, it works for me but I linked to it by my phone so that may be the problem. I'll take a look when I get home tonight and post a link from my computer. Apologies. If you Google 'Alain de Botton - how to make an attractive city' it should take you straight to the video.
  15. I haven't posted on here for some time for various reasons but I think this video is incredibly important in understanding the needs and requirements for regenerating a city in a sustainable way, for the betterment of all its citizens and without cow towing to vested self interest groups (SCC and universities take note). As people who know me from old will know, I'm not religious but this is as close to a bible for me as I can imagine!
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.