Lydgate Reservoir Evelyn Rd Planning consultation Evelyn Rd S10

[biotechpete 10]

Given the demand for housing in the area this looks like good 'sustainable' development, infilling a brownfield sight. The develpers should be applauded.

 

20 or even fewer homes is unlikely to make much difference to the traffic and no road widening would be needed since the road is the same width as the lower part of Evelyn Rd which has far more than about 40 houses and yet is still a quiet residential street.

[Smithers 10]

Another leter from Yorkshire Water better news I think

 

 

Dear Councilor

 

Thank you for your letter dated 11 April 2012 regarding the information you have received about Lydgate Reservoir from Mr. xxxxxxxxxxx

 

I am sorry if the two letters require some clarification regarding Lydgate Reservoir. The future for Lydgate is not definite at the moment and, as mentioned, we are reviewing a number of options. One of which is selling the site, as mentioned in my letter to Nick Clegg MP.

 

A detailed investigation is required to determine the extent of work which would be necessary to bring Lydgate reservoir up to the standard for storage of potable water. When this has been completed, we will undertake an appraisal of repair options, costs and risks. It is anticipated at this stage that complete demolition and a full rebuild will be required and that significant funding will be needed to undertake this work.

 

We have not set any timescales for the detailed inspection, however it is hoped that it will be in the next six to twelve months. The current preference is that we will be looking to secure funding for a rebuild of the reservoir in the next Asset Management Programmed from 2015 but this is not guaranteed.

 

Thank you again for your enquiry. I regret that I cannot be more specific, however, Lydgate will not be providing potable water for customers for some time to come.

 

Yours sincerely

Richard Flint Chief Executive

[Smithers 10]

Just an up date FYI

Dear Mr xxxxxxxxxx

 

I am writing in response to the petition raised objecting to the proposed housing allocation at Lydgate Reservoir, Evelyn Road. After the petition was acknowledged by Sarah Smith from the Sheffield Development Framework (SDF) Team, it was reported to the City Centre and East Planning Board on 10 th. April 2012.

 

In order to inform the initial decision to be made by Cabinet further work is currently being undertaken in response to the points raised by the petition. Highways officers are being consulted further to help inform the likely impacts and mitigation measures of the narrow access and increased noise due to extra traffic. The best time for ecological surveys is spring and one is scheduled for Lydgate Reservoir.

 

There is additional work being done in response to other issues raised during the public consultation earlier in the year. For example we are consulting the TV mast operators with regards to layout of Lydgate Reservoir which may reduce the density of any housing development. However, the single most significant issue to resolve is Yorkshire Water’s plans for the reservoir, which there is currently some confusion over.

 

The initial decision on whether to propose Lydgate Reservoir as a housing allocation will be made by Cabinet, when they are asked to approve the SDF City Policies and Sites document, before it goes before Full Council in the autumn. There will then be a final six week opportunity to make representations prior to submission of the document to Government. A public examination of the document by an independent planning inspector is timetabled for 2013, which is required before the document is adopted as new planning policy to inform any subsequent planning application. I hope this update on our progress on this matter is helpful yours sincerely

 

 

Helen Mirfin -Boukouris

[Smithers 10]

Subject: Re: Lydgate Reservoir, Sheffield

 

GOOD NEWS I THINK

 

 

 

Sarah- I write further to previous correspondence suggesting that Lydgate Service Reservoir should be included in Sheffield's Site Allocations Document with a reasonable prospect of being taken out of operational use and therefore available for redevelopment for residential use. I have now been informed by my operational colleagues that they are undertaking further investigations with regard to our distribution network in the area.

 

Because of this I am not satisfied that there is in fact a "reasonable prospect" of the site coming forward within the plan period. I would therefore like to withdraw the site at least until our investigations are complete. I am hopeful that we will have more certainty by the representations stage of the Publication Version and if in fact the site does prove to be surplus to operational use I will then ask for it to be included.

 

 

 

If you require further information, please contact me again. Kind regards.

 

 

 

Stephanie

 

 

 

Stephanie Walden

 

Land Use Planning Manager

 

Yorkshire Water

 

tel: 01274 692349

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

They say

I write further to previous correspondence suggesting that Lydgate Service Reservoir should be included in Sheffield's Site Allocations Document with a reasonable prospect of being taken out of operational use and therefore available for redevelopment for residential use. I have now been informed by my operational colleagues that they are undertaking further investigations with regard to our distribution network in the area.

 

Because of this I am not satisfied that there is in fact a "reasonable prospect" of the site coming forward within the plan period. I would therefore like to withdraw the site at least until our investigations are complete. I am hopeful that we will have more certainty by the representations stage of the Publication Version and if in fact the site does prove to be surplus to operational use I will then ask for it to be included.

 

I'd have said

"Sheffield's Site Allocations Document was going to include Lydgate Service Reservoir as available for new houses etc. My colleagues are now investigating YW's water distribution in the area.

 

I'm therefore not sure that the site will be available. I therefore wish to delete it from the Document, for the time being. When we reach the stage of seeking views from interested parties, we might know more- and, if so, I'll ask for it to be reinstated."

 

Better?

[Smithers 10]

Good News

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/community/green-scene/15-sites-for-new-houses-in-sheffield-1-5323111

[gravity426 10]

Good News

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/community/green-scene/15-sites-for-new-houses-in-sheffield-1-5323111

 

If I lived on blakeney road I would be jumping for joy today.

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

Yes- it says Hadfield and Lydgate reservoirs in Crookes, where 60 homes were proposed, are no longer available - Yorkshire Water wants to keep them in use.

[Smithers 10]

Hi just to save you trawling through the web site to find relative information no change in Planning regards the site this is the councils response to our comments I draw your attention to no5

 

 

 

 

 

General Response A

 

 

 

P00497 Lydgate Reservoir, Evelyn Road - This response relates to all of the issues raised and covers issues raised by other objectors to the site allocation.

 

 

 

Site no longer allocated - Due to the operational update provided by Yorkshire Water outside the consultation period (see comment ASAO 569), there is no reasonable prospect that this site would be developed for residential development during the Plan period. Therefore the site will not be allocated, although as it will remain in the Housing Policy Area and could come forward as a windfall site. However this is not due to issues raised by any of the consultees’ issues below.

 

 

Residential Amenity - Any planning application would need to take account of the amenity of current residents and not result in overshadowing, loss of privacy, or harm to living conditions. Therefore these reasons would not prevent development of the site as a whole. Policy F1 has been amended, so that any external lighting resulting from the development would not have unacceptable impacts for people living nearby.

 

 

Ecology - The ecological value is insufficient to prevent allocation of the site, although Policy G1 require the biodiversity to be improved in the development, healthy mature trees to be retained and any trees that need to be removed would need replacing.

 

 

Transmitting Station - The owners of the transmitting station (Arqiva) have proposed, following the consultation period, some conditions on development (on the basis that the land levels are not raised) which would ensure that ICNIRP guidelines are met and therefore that there are no health and safety issues in relation to the broadcast mast. The proximity to the mast may affect individual’s decision to purchase, but there is no evidence that this would affect the deliverability of this site, or lengthen the time-period over which the site would be developed. Such conditions would need to be met, if a planning application was submitted, but are not incorporated in the City Policies and Sites Document as the site is no longer to be allocated. The mast at the police station already conforms to ICNIRP standards for general public exposure, so it won’t be an issue if additional housing was to be built at the Lydgate Reservoir site.

 

 

Parking and access – (ASAO62). Evelyn Road is the standard width for a road of this nature, and would be able to support traffic from proposed development on a site this size. There is no alternative access to consider. As part of the consideration of any planning application, it will be necessary to ensure that bin lorries and emergency services can access the site. If the site had been allocated, a condition of developing the housing allocation would be to require waiting restrictions on one side of the road, and communal visitor parking within the site, which would need to also accommodate any displaced parking of existing residents. The pavement would remain even if the current gates to the reservoir had to be moved, but the street trees and grass verges won’t need affected. If off-street parking is not wide enough on the right hand side, residents can apply to the Council to increase the width of the dropped crossing at their expense. Similarly obtaining consent from the Council for a disabled parking space is outside the scope of the SDF consultation. Any development at the Lydgate Reservoir site should not affect the street trees or the grass verges on Evelyn Road.

 

 

Construction traffic - a condition would be included in any planning consent which required details of construction traffic movement areas on site along with details of provision for contractor parking.

 

 

Traffic - If a planning application was submitted on this site for residential development, it is not expected that traffic from a site this size would have a material impact on Lydgate Lane.

 

 

School Places - The small size of the site means that if the site was developed for housing, the additional pupils from the housing development would be marginal, and would be resolved alongside solutions to accommodate existing school population increases.

 

 

Dwelling Numbers (ASAO62) - The dwelling capacity is based on the appropriate density of the site (i.e,. 30-50 dwellings per hectare), in relation to Core Strategy CS26. The dwelling capacity will however be reduced to take account of broadcasting station and TV receive pole (see ASAO380), so the land available for housing development is reduced thus affecting dwelling numbers. The broadcasting station restricts development to two storeys on most of the site (see ASAO380) but there are no conditions to be added requiring bungalows.

 

 

Other Allocations suggested -The draft SDF City Policies and Sites document and Proposals Map (2010) has already proposed allocating a large number of sites for housing (including the Hallam Towers site (P00346) and the Tapton Hall of Residence (P00353). Norton Centre is not a suitable site for a housing allocation due to its location.

 

 

Housing Land Supply - New student accommodation contributes to the supply of housing and meets a specific need. However, our latest assessments of housing land supply suggest that, because of changes in the housing market, the land supply to 2026 is very tight. More sites are needed that are suitable for family housing and the proposed additional sites would provide more choice for developers, particularly in areas where relatively few other allocated sites have already been proposed.

[MagicThumbs 10]

Any update on this. There has been a lot of activity and traffic going into the site recently. Are plans afoot?

[Smithers 10]

Don't think so they are keeping the dam so working on that I think , councillor smith said he would let me know if any thing changed