Sheffield General Cemetery MEGATHREAD (excl. tours)

[WallBuilder 10]

I've managed now to negotiate the councils planning web site and so have seen the plans and notice with interest how much land is going with the building. This does seem slightly odd and rather excessive.

If the chapel has been sold off then that obviously means that part of the regeneration stops as far as making it a community venture but there is still the 'greek temple' structure that could be turned into something quite spectacular so let's hope that happens at some point.

[nick2 10]

Another chunk of our history quietly dissapears.

[Tony 10]

It disappeared long ago when the Council sold a long lease to a Sheffield gentleman who did nothing with it and let it get into the state it is in today. They also gave him a lease on Glossop Road Baths, where he also did nothing as the building rotted.

 

Not I hasten to add the same gentleman who is wanting to redevelop the chapel, who conincidently was the eventual developer of the Baths. I think that the Baths turned out ok. Yes?

[nick2 10]

Not I hasten to add the same gentleman who is wanting to redevelop the chapel, who conincidently was the eventual developer of the Baths. I think that the Baths turned out ok. Yes?

 

The Turkish baths bit did, yes.

[Insidestory 10]

The Glossop Road baths redevelopment as been described to me by a professional as the "worst heritage restoration in Sheffield", and that's saying something. The baths part is OK, but large parts of the rest have been done very unsympathetically, and internal features removed or damaged. It makes you wonder what could be done to a largely empty chapel to make it worse, but surely this is best left to the Friends who've been working for years to raise money and keep the cemetery together for the people of Sheffield and Sharrow.

 

The council planning department website is the place to make your views known, and stop this dodgy privatisation (url is quoted above).

[Insidestory 10]

Access to history in Sheffield is about to get a whole lot worse if the plans to turn the Anglican Chapel off Cemetery Road into a private residence are allowed to go ahead.

 

The plans have been lodged with the Planning department by property developer Steven Wilkinson (He's already had a large photograph holding up his baby to the world in the TELEGRAPH - so he won't mind being name-checked here).

 

His plans show that the footpath between Cemetery Road and Montague Street is going to be cut off for use as a car park and car park access road. This is used by hundreds of people every day to get them to and from work, by local people going to the shops, by families taking their kids out for a walk, by the Friends group on their tours, by people just having a stroll and enjoying the solitude.

 

But what should really incense history buffs like me is that he's going to enclose the monuments by the Cemetery Road entrance for a private garden. It means that the relatives of the thirty or so graves and memorials in this area will not be able to get near them. Not only that, but the original burial place of James Montgomery, used before his statue and remains were moved to the Cathedral, will be part of his garden.

 

There are a dozen other reasons to object to these plans, but don't take my word for it - examine them yourself - they're on the council planning website and please please make a comment online there. The Cemetery Friends already have plans for the chapel, to guarantee community use, so don't let this guy privatise our history.

[retep 68]

Just another bit of Sheffield's history down the pan, wonder how long before planning permission goes in for a block of flats.

 

I notice that the former Kelvin Metals, part of the Old Barracks has all but fallen down, probably rife for development.

[Insidestory 10]

Hi all

 

I thought the Granma's link would take me through to where you can make comment on the application, but it doesn't. Not easy to find, but this might work:

 

Will have to go through planning.sheffield.gov.uk and then you put

 

06/01866/FUL

 

in as the reference. At the top of the page is the bit where you can submit comments.

[jamesogt 11]

What the hell has the church got to do with it? If you're going to have an opinion, please make it an informed one.

 

The cemetery were already in the middle of a restoration scheme which would have saved both the Anglican chapel AND the non-conformist one (the greek temple one) and kept it for community use. All they needed was to get the lease back on that building, which was in process.

 

Jamesogt, have you not noticed how much fundraising and restoration work has been done across the rest of the site? Do you really think nobody was "making an effort to regenerate what really is a mess"? The chapel site was the cemetery trust's next major project, but the chapel has been sold despite those plans being in the works.

 

If the new application goes through, the cemetery site manager will be out of a job because of how his wages are funded. This proposal could have serious knock on effects for the maintenance of the rest of the site. I can't say anymore at the present time but I will keep people updated if they want to pm me.

 

No i havent noticed? it looks like a ruined old church with completly overgrown shrubbery? What exactly does the cemetery site manager do ? It doesn't appear to be a lot to manage?

 

Maybe it should be added that the new developer of the scheme is made to take responsibility for the rest of the site also if he wants to have the chapel area.

 

Also what was the community use planned for both the chapel sites?

[Insidestory 10]

What I know is that theres a bunch of committed (yes perhaps they should be) local volunteers who have spent the last sixteen years building up the site from the inaccessible wilderness it once was to the much loved greenspace it is today.

 

 

Use it or lose it people.

[purdyamos 10]

No i havent noticed? it looks like a ruined old church with completly overgrown shrubbery? What exactly does the cemetery site manager do ? It doesn't appear to be a lot to manage?

 

Maybe it should be added that the new developer of the scheme is made to take responsibility for the rest of the site also if he wants to have the chapel area.

 

Also what was the community use planned for both the chapel sites?

 

 

You haven't noticed? I was talking about the entire cemetery site, and if you really haven't noticed the amount of changes and restoration that has been done then you really are ignorant of the site. If you are that unaware of what's been achieved so far then it waters down your right to an opinion considerably, because it is simply uniformed.

 

The amount of work that has gone into the place is phenomenal. The Gatehouse was rebuilt from total ruins, and is now a warden's quarters and the office of the Cemetery Trust. The area next to that has been made into a large garden with gravelled seating areas and flourishing herbacious beds.

 

Further along by the river large-scale earth moving took place to reveal old egyptian-style staircases (as yet unrestored) and a stone spiral garden created. The large green space has been re-landscaped, benches and bins put in and more planted beds. On top of all that the volunteers have been getting rid of the ugly bramble scrub to allow the grasses and wildflowers to grow. This has made the cemetery a haven for wildlife, and for people too, who felt intimidated by the site when it was derelict. To say that nothing has been done to the site is fatuous, to say the least. The amount of fundraising, time and effort put in has been significant. And that's not even counting tons worth of litter picking and needle-clearing.

 

Maintenance of the beds, paths and woodland patches is a never ending task. The council does nothing beyond cut the large grassy area and move dangerous slabs of stone when tombs are vandalised. The rest is down to a tiny group of volunteers and one part time worker, the site manager. Contrary to what you say, James, he has his work cut out overseeing all this, while having to work on general fundraising applications and our own plans for the restoration of the chapels. You have obvioulsy never worked for a charity or in conservation if you really think there is nothing for the site manager to do.

 

All the work done so far in the cemetery has been in partnership with heritage organisations who will quite simply lose interest if we lose the Anglican chapel. It will destroy the integrity of the site as a whole, the funds may dry up and the place will deteriorate again. The new chapel design plan is insensitive to its location and ignores matters of architectural sensitivity.

 

The alternative plans that were/are in process would have saved both the Anglican AND non-conformist chapels, which would be restored in a harmonious way in partnership with heritage experts. They would remain fully part of the cemetery site, accessible to the public. There are legal reasons why I cannot name the prospective tenants right now, I am waiting for news this or next week, because there is a lot going on behind the scenes. All I can say is that the refusal of the current planning application will NOT mean the building stays derelict.

 

Long one, sorry, but it needed to be said. There's a lot of ignorance out there.

[purdyamos 10]

Oh, and if any one wants to oppose the plans the place to contact is -

 

Margaret Smith, planning officer, Sheffield City Council planning department,Howden House, Sheffield S1 2HH

 

The deadline is 14th July.