Ridgeway

Showing comments and forms 1 to 8 of 8

Comment

Schedule of Sites Consultation Document (February 2015)

Representation ID: 1729

Received: 25/03/2015

Respondent: Tracey Marsden, Nicola Shepherdson & Mark Woodhead

Agent: Spawforths

Representation:

Site submission at Land off Camdale Rise, Ridgeway

Full text:

Site submission at Land off Camdale Rise, Ridgeway.

Comment

Schedule of Sites Consultation Document (February 2015)

Representation ID: 1865

Received: 26/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Michael Mason

Representation:

Support recommended growth for Ridgeway of 15 dwellings.
Any build on the land mentioned in ECK/2104 would inevitably lead to pressure to build on other parts of the Green Belt. Any development on that area would be detrimental to the character of this village. In addition, there are already immense traffic pressures immediately adjacent to the area, caused by the school traffic twice a day. There are no shops or services.
Already identified sites will provide sufficient housing need to meet the Council requirements in the period of the Plan and that any proposed development within ECK/2104 should be refused.

Full text:

I am pleased to note from the draft plan that in the Schedule of Sites Consultation Document (February 2015) it says, "The recommended growth for Ridgeway is 15 dwellings over the 20 year Plan Period 2011 to 2031. Up to 31st March 2014, 5 dwellings had been built and another 14 dwellings had planning permission. This leaves no dwellings to allocate in the Local Plan"
Although two areas are marked in red as "Land without development potential in the Plan period" there has already been a presentation to the Parish Council to outline a scheme to deliver affordable/social housing on the area marked ECK/2104. Knowledge of that presentation led to many local concerns about development on Green Belt land, leading to a village meeting led by NEDDC Cllr Michael Gordon. Nearly 150 residents attended and the unanimous view was that any build on the land mentioned in ECK/2104 would inevitably lead to pressure to build on other parts of the Green Belt.
I attended that meeting and agree that any development on that area would be detrimental to the character of this village. In addition, there are already immense traffic pressures immediately adjacent to the area, caused by the school traffic twice a day. There are no shops, Post Office, doctors etc in the village and the Council has had to subsidise the buses to ensure we get a bus service, which is limited.
I therefore endorse the view that already identified sites will provide sufficient housing need to meet the Council requirements in the period of the Plan and that any proposed development within ECK/2104 should be refused.

Comment

Schedule of Sites Consultation Document (February 2015)

Representation ID: 2007

Received: 26/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Rodger Wylde

Representation:

Objection to site ECK/2104 in Ridgeway.

There are sufficient small sites within the village to create new homes without building a large estate that would be out of character of Ridgeway and affect its beauty.

High Lane and Main Road would not be able to cope with much additional traffic, especially during school opening and closing times.

Full text:

See Enclosed Attachment

Comment

Schedule of Sites Consultation Document (February 2015)

Representation ID: 2035

Received: 25/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Jeremy White

Agent: DLP (Planning Ltd) - East Midlands office

Representation:

land offers a natural infill opportunity in a sustainable location at Ridgeway, in a location which is well linked to Sheffield.
Allocation for residential purposes would not undermine the essential purposes of GB.

site is considered suitable, available and deliverable..

-Redistribution of housing growth to increase the required levels in Ridgeway;
-Removal of the site north of High Lane, Ridgeway from the Green Belt and Conservation Area;
-Inclusion of land north of High Lane. Ridgeway within the settlement boundary of Ridgeway; and
-Allocate the land north of High Lane, Ridgeway for housing.

Full text:

See attachments

Comment

Schedule of Sites Consultation Document (February 2015)

Representation ID: 2171

Received: 06/03/2015

Respondent: Mr David Lycett

Representation:

My objection is against any housing development in the rural village of Ridgeway. Any development would have a devastating effect on the village community and indeed Ridgeway would lose its identity and deemed to be an extension of the sprawl of Sheffield (even though the land is in North East Derbyshire).

Greenbelt land should not be built on.

There is insufficient infrastructure.

The adjacent area of natural beauty that is Moss Valley would be severely compromised.

Development here would set a precedent for further development, which will absorb Ridgeway.

Full text:

I wish to object to the proposal to grant planning permission on green belt land in the village of Ridgeway

1) If granted this proposal would completely destroy the local community and the strong village identity

2) The highlighted area is within a designated green belt area and should remain so. By definition green belt is not for building on.


3) There is insufficient infrastructure to support the resultant increase in population, primarily schools and transport.

4) The adjacent area of natural beauty that is Moss Valley would be severely compromised..

5) The granting of this planning permission on green belt land would be used as a precedent for further applications in this area which would ultimately see the village of Ridgeway absorbed and lost as it became sandwiched between Mosborough, Eckington and Charnock.

Follow-up clarification of comments:
The areas of land I am commenting on are two areas. I understand two local land owners have offered land for development for which I understand planning consent can be given if the areas are for affordable housing. The areas in question are Cookes Nursery and the fields stretching from Main Road all the way along High Lane to Haven Farm.

The areas I refer to are highlighted in red as "Future Development Potential" on Schedule of Sites M-R in the local plan 2011-2031 which I understand the landowner is considering offering for affordable housing. As indicated in your email the Draft Local Plan includes a policy for exception sites for affordable housing.

My objection is against any housing development in the rural village of Ridgeway an area of outstanding natural beauty which is enjoyed by so many people and families and many species of wildlife. I feel any development would have a devastating effect on the village community and indeed Ridgeway would lose its identity and deemed to be an extension of the sprawl of Sheffield (even though the land is in North East Derbyshire).

Comment

Schedule of Sites Consultation Document (February 2015)

Representation ID: 2172

Received: 06/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs Anne Lycett

Representation:

My objection is against any housing development in the rural village of Ridgeway. Any development would have a devastating effect on the village community and indeed Ridgeway would lose its identity and deemed to be an extension of the sprawl of Sheffield (even though the land is in North East Derbyshire).

Greenbelt land should not be built on.

There is insufficient infrastructure.

The adjacent area of natural beauty that is Moss Valley would be severely compromised.

Development here would set a precedent for further development, which will absorb Ridgeway.

Full text:

I wish to strongly object to the proposal to grant planning permission on green belt land in the village of Ridgeway.

I believe this proposal would destroy the strong village community and compromise the whole area, which is the habitat for many different types of animals and plants.

The area highlighted is within a designated green belt area and this should remain so. The area is enjoyed by many people for leisure, walking, rambling and enjoying nature and the animals in the fields. The local pubs provide meals and refreshments and I believe tthese businesses could be compromised if the fields were built upon.

I believe there is insufficient infrastructure, ie public transport is very limited and a small rural infant school which could not support an increase in population.

The highlighted area is adjacent to the outstanding area of natural beauty, enjoyed by many, which is Moss Valley and any building in this area would irrevocably damage the area. I was brought on visits as a child by my parents and remember running through the fields and making daisy chains and subsequently my own children have enjoyed the same beautiful scenery.

I believe any planning permission on green belt land would open the door for further proposed development in the area which would ultimately see the charming village life of Ridgeway ruined and "sucked" into a sprawling connurbation of Mosborough/Halfway thus losing its identify and the loss of beautiful green belt land

Follow-up comments:
The areas of land I am commenting on are two areas. I understand two local land owners have offered land for development for which I understand planning consent can be given if the areas are for affordable housing. The areas in question are Cookes Nursery and the fields stretching from Main Road all the way along High Lane to Haven Farm.

The areas I refer to are highlighted in red as "Future Development Potential" on Schedule of Sites M-R in the local plan 2011-2031 which I understand the landowner is considering offering for affordable housing. As indicated in your email the Draft Local Plan includes a policy for exception sites for affordable housing.

My objection is against any housing development in the rural village of Ridgeway an area of outstanding natural beauty which is enjoyed by so many people and families and many species of wildlife. I feel any development would have a devastating effect on the village community and indeed Ridgeway would lose its identity and deemed to be an extension of the sprawl of Sheffield (even though the land is in North East Derbyshire).

Comment

Schedule of Sites Consultation Document (February 2015)

Representation ID: 2364

Received: 29/04/2015

Respondent: Mrs Patricia Jenkinson

Representation:

Re proposed building adjacent to Ridgeway Primary School.
When the Council last had a building project in Ridgeway - 1947 we had the following amenities: 2 general stores, 1 butchers, 1 newsagent, 1 co-op, 1 post office, Phoenix works (employing many locals) and 99 Bus Services, Sheffield - Chesterfield. Now, we only have an unreliable TM Travel not guaranteed to last. No shops, no industry, limited transport.
I'm opposed to the building projects but I just wonder if, in your search for sites, you have really considered the 'proposed residents', and the lack of amenities you are offering these people?

Full text:

See attachment

Comment

Schedule of Sites Consultation Document (February 2015)

Representation ID: 2365

Received: 11/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs M Robins

Representation:

I am against the suggestion that houses may be built on a Green Belt field behind Ridgeway School, for the following reasons:
* A dangerous road - too much traffic already
* School full
* No facilities - no shop, post office, etc
* Area not only Green Belt, but a Conservation Area.
The Moss Valley is an area of natural beauty used by ramblers and is home to quite a few species of wildlife. It would be heartbreaking to see these fields covered with houses.
Alternative sites: craft centre and allotments further down the village.

Full text:

See attachment