Proposed Plans For New Housing - Loxley Valley

[Crissie 18]

When the Middlewood Hospital site was developed, the developers' contribution to local community and infrastructure amounted to a small donation to Marlcliffe school's library fund.  The current proposed developments at Loxley and Oughtibridge will line the pockets of the investors, but will overburden local infrastructure - roads, churches, schools, buses etc.  Maybe if they were required to make meaningful contributions to these, the developers would be less hungry.
Yes, our society needs new houses, but we also need all those other things alongside, to really integrate it and make

it work for the benefit of all.

[Becky B 31]

22 hours ago, FIRETHORN1 said:

I have really mixed feelings about this sort of development. Of course, it's very sad when yet more green spaces and lovely rural areas are swallowed up by housing developments, but on the other hand, there's no doubt that, with an ever-growing population, there's a huge need to build much more affordable and social housing throughout the UK. Ideally, the new housing developments should be built on brownfield sites, but I guess it's inevitable that there has to be at least some encroachment into greenfield areas to meet the ever-growing need.

 

I'm in my 60's now and I and my family have lived and grown up on the Sutton and Wisewood estates, adjacent to the Loxley area, since before I was born. When I and my brothers and sister were little kids in the early '60's, I remember our grandparents visiting us on the Sutton and Wisewood estates and remembering nostalgically how that this whole area used to be just old village housing and fields  and farmland in "their day".  

 

I do agree with previous posters that it's not just about building houses though. The whole infrastructure needs to be considered - shops, schools, doctors and dentist surgeries - and most particularly, public transport. My brother and his family live in Loxley and public transport is practically non-existent....especially in the evenings. 

But there's going to be a special bus service to the proposed estate!

 

I filled in the comments form with lots of questions, one of which asked if this bus service will be subsidised by the developer, as I think they are being very naive to believe that people who could afford to live in that sort of new development (affordable housing is a very relative term) would choose to use public transport.  Don't they know the car is king? 🙄

[FIRETHORN1 58]

I agree with Becky B that "affordable housing" is a very relative term, which is why I think that, before giving the go-ahead for this proposed new development - indeed any new housing developments in the city -  Sheffield Council should insist that at least 80% of the new homes to be built should be for Social Housing. I don't have a problem if a small amount of the new homes are sold or let out as private ownership or rental - but the real need for new housing is not for those people who can afford to buy or pay market rent, but for those who can't afford it . 

[geared 317]

16 hours ago, Becky B said:

But there's going to be a special bus service to the proposed estate!

 

 

A proposed service every 15 mintues.  Straight into one of the most congested parts of the city come rush hour.

 

I can see that being next to useless when all the buses are sat in traffic.

14 hours ago, FIRETHORN1 said:

Sheffield Council should insist that at least 80% of the new homes to be built should be for Social Housing. I don't have a problem if a small amount of the new homes are sold or let out as private ownership or rental - but the real need for new housing is not for those people who can afford to buy or pay market rent, but for those who can't afford it . 

but Sheffield council aren't paying for the development?? Nor do they own the land.

 

 

 

Edited December 9, 2019 by geared

[peteh1 10]

But the council have to give planning permission and should ensure whatever affordable housing is proposed is actually delivered.

[FIRETHORN1 58]

Maybe Sheffield Council aren't paying for the new development and maybe they don't own the land, but presumably, it's down to the Council's Planning department to decide whether or not to grant the necessary planning permission. The Council should only agree to grant this planning permission to developers who agree that a certain percentage of the new homes they build will be then sold on to Housing Associations or other Social Housing providers to help ease the growing social housing shortage.

 

This what has been happening in London for the past few years. I've recently worked on new housing developments in the Camberwell and Greenwich areas, where the developers have built two identical new-build blocks of flats. One whole block was sold by the developers, as individual flats, to private buyers and the other whole block was sold to a Housing Association, who subsequently allocated the flats to people on their waiting lists.  

 

 

[NewBiz 10]

On 09/12/2019 at 14:20, peteh1 said:

But the council have to give planning permission and should ensure whatever affordable housing is proposed is actually delivered.

And how often does that happen I wonder?

[lil-minx92 10]

These days developers actually pay huge sums in Section 106 contributions in exchange for planning permission. This money helps top up the council coffers to make up for the government cuts.  Foe example on one development of 228 houses the contributions totalled over 2 million pounds split between sustainable travel (based on a rate per bedroom), Education (based on a certain number of primary and secondary school places at £X per place), compensation for loss of green space, and a sum to provide and maintain alternative off site green space.  They would also have to provide a certain percentage of affordable homes, which are sold at reduced rates to housing associations. 

Averaging it out it came to around £10k per house.

Ultimately the majority of these costs often fall on the landowner because the developer will reduce their offer for the land accordingly.