Jump to content
We’re excited to announce the forum is under new management! Details to follow.

300 Houses In Loxley Valley

Recommended Posts

On 07/09/2020 at 16:08, taxman said:

Application has been refused on a number of grounds including damage to greenbelt, unsustainability, flood risk, poor transport links and a failure to by the developers to enage with planners before application.

Great, another few years of derelict factories. Whoopee!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/09/2020 at 13:25, feargal said:

They can appeal or they might put in revised plans (I suspect very few developers expect a first time pass!). 

 

Quite interesting to read the objections and comments.  Certainly a lot of  NIMBYism, alongside genuine issues such as traffic concerns at Malin Bridge. 

 

 

I suspect they could resolve all the concerns and people would still oppose it again. There is a big housing shortage and we need to build more I'm afraid. 

Edited by nightrider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so much a housing shortage as too many people. And I doubt they could resolve all concerns when they're trying to build 300 houses in a beautiful wooded valley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Magneteer.  Of course, building new housing in a beautiful wooded valley is not ideal - especially for those people who are already living in the aforementioned "beautiful wooded valley", but the plain fact is that we have a rapidly growing population and unless we start culling people, or compulsorily sterilising them, the population will continue to grow - and we will simply need more housing to accommodate this growing population. We particularly need more Social Housing, for those people who can't afford - and who never will be able to afford -  to buy  their own properties.

 

The last 3 generations of my family grew up on the Sutton and Wisewood  Social Housing estates, adjacent to the Loxley Valley. It was a lovely place to grow up - nice houses, most with their own front and/ or back gardens. close enough to shopping and transport links, yet  also on the doorstep of wonderful countryside.

 

  If you look at old fotos of that area from the 1920's/30's  - ie before the Sutton & Wisewood estates were built there, you will see that it was mostly fields and farming land . My point here is, that if you are going to cater to the needs of a growing population, you have to accept that you are going to have to build on green belt land to some extent. The key to me is how you do this. Don't just throw up crap, system built housing, - like Kelvin Flats for example - but plan ahead and build the kind of homes that people will be proud of and  enjoy living in. If you build decent housing that people can comfortably live in, if you back this up with decent local services and transport links, then it will  be  do - able. Not ideal by any means - but just like when the Sutton and  Wisewood estates were built there in  the 1920's and 30's - it would definitely be do-able.

7 minutes ago, FIRETHORN1 said:

  y

 

Edited by FIRETHORN1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/09/2020 at 20:27, FIRETHORN1 said:

I agree with Magneteer.  Of course, building new housing in a beautiful wooded valley is not ideal - especially for those people who are already living in the aforementioned "beautiful wooded valley", but the plain fact is that we have a rapidly growing population and unless we start culling people, or compulsorily sterilising them, the population will continue to grow - and we will simply need more housing to accommodate this growing population. We particularly need more Social Housing, for those people who can't afford - and who never will be able to afford -  to buy  their own properties.

 

The last 3 generations of my family grew up on the Sutton and Wisewood  Social Housing estates, adjacent to the Loxley Valley. It was a lovely place to grow up - nice houses, most with their own front and/ or back gardens. close enough to shopping and transport links, yet  also on the doorstep of wonderful countryside.

 

  If you look at old fotos of that area from the 1920's/30's  - ie before the Sutton & Wisewood estates were built there, you will see that it was mostly fields and farming land . My point here is, that if you are going to cater to the needs of a growing population, you have to accept that you are going to have to build on green belt land to some extent. The key to me is how you do this. Don't just throw up crap, system built housing, - like Kelvin Flats for example - but plan ahead and build the kind of homes that people will be proud of and  enjoy living in. If you build decent housing that people can comfortably live in, if you back this up with decent local services and transport links, then it will  be  do - able. Not ideal by any means - but just like when the Sutton and  Wisewood estates were built there in  the 1920's and 30's - it would definitely be do-able.

 

The lack of a provision for affordable housing was one of the numerous objections to this particular project.

 

300 two (or more) car households stuffed into a river valley. Given that  are experiencing  more flooding year on year at the moment and are already building too many new houses on flood plains, anyone with a rudimentary grasp of flood management and the history of Loxley Valley could see that building 300 houses in that location  would just be tempting fate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm delighted. Well done SCC Planning dept and Committee!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding affordable housing - does anyone know what that equates to in Sheffield, ie how much to rent/buy?  I'm too lazy to google 😉  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, feargal said:

Regarding affordable housing - does anyone know what that equates to in Sheffield, ie how much to rent/buy?  I'm too lazy to google 😉  

No idea. I'd google it for you but i can't be arsed either!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/09/2020 at 20:27, FIRETHORN1 said:

I agree with Magneteer.  Of course, building new housing in a beautiful wooded valley is not ideal - especially for those people who are already living in the aforementioned "beautiful wooded valley", but the plain fact is that we have a rapidly growing population and unless we start culling people, or compulsorily sterilising them, the population will continue to grow - and we will simply need more housing to accommodate this growing population. We particularly need more Social Housing, for those people who can't afford - and who never will be able to afford -  to buy  their own properties.

 

The last 3 generations of my family grew up on the Sutton and Wisewood  Social Housing estates, adjacent to the Loxley Valley. It was a lovely place to grow up - nice houses, most with their own front and/ or back gardens. close enough to shopping and transport links, yet  also on the doorstep of wonderful countryside.

 

  If you look at old fotos of that area from the 1920's/30's  - ie before the Sutton & Wisewood estates were built there, you will see that it was mostly fields and farming land . My point here is, that if you are going to cater to the needs of a growing population, you have to accept that you are going to have to build on green belt land to some extent. The key to me is how you do this. Don't just throw up crap, system built housing, - like Kelvin Flats for example - but plan ahead and build the kind of homes that people will be proud of and  enjoy living in. If you build decent housing that people can comfortably live in, if you back this up with decent local services and transport links, then it will  be  do - able. Not ideal by any means - but just like when the Sutton and  Wisewood estates were built there in  the 1920's and 30's - it would definitely be do-able.

 

Interesting that there is some acknowledgement that there is ‘rapidly growing’ population and although not ideal that means building on a ‘beautiful wooded area’. On a thread on a different topic on this forum so people were quite vociferous in stating that there is ‘plenty of room’ in this country and people can be accommodated without tearing up countryside.

The fact is that there populations cannot grow and grow indefinitely. Something has to give eventually and someone has to have the balls to say no. We cannot build on every bit of spare land. To pick out one aspect of the loxley planning permission refusal: flood risk. Very very simply put if too much land is built on, people’s homes will be flooded and business premises damaged. I’m sure none of us want that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, redruby said:

Interesting that there is some acknowledgement that there is ‘rapidly growing’ population and although not ideal that means building on a ‘beautiful wooded area’. On a thread on a different topic on this forum so people were quite vociferous in stating that there is ‘plenty of room’ in this country and people can be accommodated without tearing up countryside.

The fact is that there populations cannot grow and grow indefinitely. Something has to give eventually and someone has to have the balls to say no. We cannot build on every bit of spare land. To pick out one aspect of the loxley planning permission refusal: flood risk. Very very simply put if too much land is built on, people’s homes will be flooded and business premises damaged. I’m sure none of us want that.

There is plenty of room - just get in an airplane and fly over the UK. All you can see is green for the most part! Of course thats a different question to how much room there is in the Loxley part of Sheffield. But there's no doubt an expanding population in in this and other nearby areas (Walkley, Crookes etc) and a lack of housing available (just witness how multiple parties bid on nearly any house for sale resulting in a sale well above asking price, at least in Walkley/Crookes - not so sure about Loxley/Stanningtron - perhaps less of an issue because they don't have access to the  popular secondary good schools?). I had friends who took a year to get a house in Greystones for example (some years ago now), because the bidding was so fierce for anything decent.

 

 

 

Edited by nightrider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • 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.