Recent Bulletins

BULLETIN – Published 25 September 2025

Dear All. An invitation to our next Community Meeting

MECK COMMUNITY GROUP – COMMUNITY MEETING

THURSDAY 2 OCTOBER 6.30 – 8.30

Venue – Holy Trinity Church Hall, Grove Rd S7 2HB

All Local Residents Welcome. Our apologies for the lateness of this Bulletin and notice of the Community Meeting – this was due to some information late being shared.

Key Items on the AGENDA [Minutes of the last Community Meeting – April 2025 are attached, and there will be Matters Arising from those: e.g. See below for Other Updates.

1. Treasurer’s Report

2. The Bents Green Street Trees project – Update.
A bid was lodged with the South Yorkshire Mayoral Authorityto fund planting of street trees around the Bents Green shopping area, and we also received a grant from the South West Local Area Committee to support this project. Unfortunately the Mayoral Bid was unsuccessful, so we need to discuss how this project might now be taken forward.

3. Neighbourhood Watch – Speaker & Discussion
Les Day from the national Neighbourhood Watch committee will describe the work and benefits of the Scheme, and answer questions.

4. The Springfield Rd Nursery Planning Application
This Application has received a considerable number of Comments both for and against it being approved by the Planning Committee. The Group has so far only made a Neutral Comment about this Application. This is a chance for residents to express their views on whether we should abide by that position, or if the Group might want to make a further Formal Objection to the Planning Committee. There is no guarantee that the Committee would be swayed by our views in either case, of course. The meeting will hopefully hear from both the Applicant and from representatives of local objectors.

5. A625 Safer Road Scheme.
The Council’s original proposals were consulted on earlier in the year, and we understand there were modifications as a result. The Highways Dept is due to submit a Report to the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee with new proposals, for them to discuss and approve. The Report is expected to be published w/c 13 October: the Committee will discuss it and if appropraite we aim to make a representation to the Committee before it is discussed by Councillors.
It is rumoured that the original proposal to close the top of Millhouses Lane has been dropped, but there were other proposals that we might want to discuss and agree a position on during the meeting.

6. Banner Cross Hall – An update
The proposal for the Hall to become an independent Special School has raised issues, with possible implications for the future of the rest of the site.

7. Next South West Local Area Committee Meeting.
The next meeting will be on Thursday 9 October, 7.00- 9.00pm; at Dore Methodist Church, 3 Savage Lane, Dore, S17 3GW. The meeting will be devoted to explanation of the work of the Council’s various Policy Committees and an opportunity to ask questions and discuss which issues they deal with that might matter to you in your community. List of the various committees follows; with links to the appropriate section of the Council website if you want to know more.

• Adult Health and Social Care Policy Committee
• Communities, Parks and Leisure Policy Committee
• Economic Development, Skills and Culture Policy Committee
• Education, Children and Families Policy Committee
• Environmental Services and Regulation Policy Committee
• Finance and Performance Policy Committee
• Housing Policy Committee
• Strategy and Resources Policy Committee
• Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee

8. The Group is going to need a new Treasurer!
John Douglas our current Treasurer will be stepping down at the next Annual General Meeting in April 2026. We will ask for volunteers to take over and explain what the work involves and what might be expected from a new
Treasurer. 

Updates on other issues.

a) Abbey Lane Crossing Campaign

We have been informed that work on the main agreed components of the project are expected to begin early in the New Year. These are:

• A multi-purpose Signal-controlled Crossing at the bottom end of the Woods where the Bridle Way crosses the road. This will acommodate pedestrians, cyclists, wheel-chair and buggy users and horse-riders, with an extended crossing-time and greater width.
• Pedestrian refuges mid-way in the road between the above and the junctions of Abbey Lane and Whirlowdale Rd; two were shown on the last plans we saw.
• Other enhancements including footways are being considered as part of the detailed design process.”

We are also told that “the scheme is currently in the detailed design stage with contractors and so the design of the full scheme has not yet been shared publicly. Completion of the detailed design phase is expected by the end of October; and plans should be shared via local Councillors.”

We would have liked to see some more measures to make the two junctions of Abbey Lane and Whirlowdale Rd safer for pedestrians and also for vehicles exiting the lower part of Whirlowdale Rd. It is still unclear how much of this will make it into the final design.

b) Dobbin Hill – Sale of Grass Verge Dispute

You may remember that last year a local resident on Dobbin Hill obtained a Planning Change of Use for the grass verge outside his house, with the intention of buying it from the Council. This required a Highway Closure Order from the Department forTransport [DfT], who organised a Consultation with local residents to assess opinion and opposition or support for this sale. As a result there were many Objections to the sale and loss of the grass verge – including one made by the Community Group after a Community Meeting in April discussed and voted on the issue.

The DfT decided to hold a Public Enquiry before a Government Inspector to hear arguments from both sides and make a recommendation to the Minister for Transport whether or not to allow the closure of that part of the highway and its sale. This Public Enquiry will take place on 15th and 16th December, in the Cutlers Hall in central Sheffield. It isn’t clear how long it will take for a final decision to be made.

We hope to see lots of you at that Meeting. Any queries please feel free to get in touch with me – M. 07887 570762 E. mikehodson26@gmail.com


BULLETIN – published 22 January 2024
A Special Planning Issues Bulletin. I am aware that planning applications are often very local, so what matters to some people has little relevance to others in a different part of the area. However I try to choose those for description and comment that seem to have some wider significance. So the Email Bulletin contains only brief introductions for each site; while this Bulletin goes into more detail – so you can pick only the site(s) that interest you.

1. Connect Fibre company – Plans for new broadband poles in parts of S7 and S11

As noted in my Bulletin of 15 November {see the Bulletins Archive]; the Connect Fibre company have been advertising their intention to erect new poles in several parts of the area – notably Millhouses Lane, Silverdale Rd, Whirlowdale Rd, etc. – as part of their offer of a new broadband service to compete with Virgin Media, British Telecom, etc. Some of you may well have seen these adverts, although there have also been complaints that they are hidden away and not easily spotted. Some are also on poles some way from the sites they are referring to, so that some residents potentially affected may not see them.

As I said in the Bulletin such poles – unlike mobile masts – do not need planning permission or Council consent [unless they qualify as “dangerous” or “obstructive”] and there are no powers to stop them in most cases. However a number of residents, initially on Whirlow Park Rd, but now elsewhere also, have combined to register their objections with Connect Fibre on the grounds that the poles are visually intrusive, and that the residents have no intention of taking up the company’s offer as they are already well-served by the existing broadband services. The possibility that local street trees and even garden trees might have to be trimmed or felled to allow the broadband cables to be strung from pole to pole has also alarmed many people. Connect Fibre has been left in no doubt that many local residents are opposed, with few people keen to take up their offer.

It now seems that the Council – prompted by complaints via local Councillors – have also confronted Connect Fibre to point out that the Code of Conduct for telecommunications companies does require them to first make use of existing poles and to run cables underground where possible, and that new poles should only used as a last resort. It seems that Connect Fibre have responded positively to this. [See this article in the Star from mid-December]

A recent letter sent to many of the complaining residents from Connect Fibre says:

“This is a quick update to advise we have been looking into yours’ and your neighbours’ concerns raised and are currently reviewing …. all proposed Pole locations here and in the surrounding streets. This is taking a bit of time so we shall be popping these poles on pause now until further notice to allow for this. Should we after this review decide to proceed with any poles we will advise you; however this will not be in the immediate future, so I hope this helps to settle your concerns.”

2. River Sheaf Walk and the STEPS Planning Application.

Planning Portal Reference – 13/03638/FUL

We were alerted by the Sheaf&Porter Rivers Trust about the above planning application and asked if we could comment on, and if possible to object to it. This is [just] within Ecclesall Ward so it is within our area of interest. You can access the Trust website page about this at https://www.sheafportertrust.org/river-sheaf-walk with a useful map etc.

This Application affected the East bank of the River Sheaf, which lies within our Group area of interest. The Application is for an additional building for the STEPS Therapeutic Facility which lies immediately adjacent to the river between the Addlington Retirement Living complex [AKA Jacobs Gate] and Troutbeck Road: if it is implemented it would considerably reduce the usable space between the river and the STEPS buildings, and thus limit the completion of the long-planned River Sheaf Walk along that stretch.

Our previous group – Carter Knowle & Millhouses Community Group, which merged with Ecclesall Forum in 2022 to form the current MECK Community Group – supported the development of a River Sheaf Trail right from its initiation in 2005. When this route is completed it will give a continuous walking, cycling [and potentially wheelchair-accessable] route all the way from Millhouses Park to the City Centre, which mostly avoids roads, especially main roads, altogether.

It was disturbing to read that the expansion proposed by the STEPS Facility would restrict the width of this section of the Walk route to 2m, which would seriously limit – if not prevent altogether – its use by cyclists and wheelchairs; and would also reduce the amenity value and pleasure for users of the Walk by the erection of high and solid fences between the walkway and the river.

This is rendered even more disturbing by the fact that;
a) the section of the Walkway to the South, alongside the Jacobs Gate complex, is already agreed under a previous planning permission to be 3m wide – a permission which initially also applied to the STEPS facility – and
b) there is a building constructed by STEPS at the Southern end of their property without planning permission which also potentially limit the possible width of the walkway, and which the Council Planning Dept have so far refrained from taking enforcement action against; and
c) the application also suggested that the surfacing of the walkway should be changed from its previous design to a cheaper version that would be less safe and less sustainable; and
d) no measures to safeguard the many trees and shrubs alongside the river, or to protect the wildlife that uses the area, were being proposed.

A satisfactory completion of this link in the Walk would allow, with the collaboration of Tesco’s, the completion of a section of the Walk from Millhouses Park northwards to the north end of Archer Rd, and beyond via Norton Hammer and Little London Rd onwards towards the City Centre. This would not only benefit local residents with easy and more pleasant access to Millhouses Park but also a walkable and cyclable access to local shops and other amenities to the North – including for residents of both STEPS and the Jacobs Gate complex – avoiding use of Abbeydale Rd and Archer Rd. This would also meet the Council’s policies for more active travel infrastructure.

We suggested to the planners that:
I) planning permission should be refused until measures to safeguard the 3m width, to ensure the safety and usability of the walkway, to ensure an uninterrupted view of the river, and to protect the trees, vegetation and wildlife alongside the river, are incorporated; and
(ii) the ongoing status of this section of the walkway should be protected by a permanent Condition in the eventual Permission – should that be granted.

You can see a lot more already-lodged Comments and Objections on the Planning Portal – https://planningapps.sheffield.gov.uk/online-applications/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

Update – May 2025.
In November 2024 the Planning Committee heard an application from the STEPS company, also supported by their neighbour xxx, for the approval of the the above proposals, despite the Walkway not being 3m wide.
The Rivers Trust, our Group, and Ecclesall Councillor Barbara Masters all opposed this approval. Councillors on the Planning Committee agreed with our arguments [above]; were almost unanimous in their criticism of STEPS for their refusal to abide by the original Permission which required a 3m wide way, and refused the requested approval.

Earlier this year [2025] the STEPS company lodged another Application for a new building to the North of the existing building which would also restrict the width of the Walkway, and also for approval of the previous building [erected without permission during the pandemic [see b) above] which already restricts that width.
In March, despite the Rivers Trust and Councillor Masters arguing against this application before the Committee [we were not allowed to speak] the Application was approved, on the grounds that it did not affect the Walkway.
And we have learnt since that STEPS have lodged an appeal to the Goverment Inspectorate against the refusal of approval last November.

3. The Gospel Church site off Carter Knowle Rd

– see the 30 Nov Bulletin.

Some notes on this application and possible issues with it.

General desirability.

We do agree that this site should be developed, as there is a need for more housing; and because it re-develops brownfield land, rather than using green belt land which is protected for leisure and farming use, and to protect wildlife habitat.

We do have real concerns about the large number of units being planned[ 67], and doubts about whether an apartments-only scheme is the best use of this site. We also have concerns about the failure to include any affordable housing on the site; about the potential threat of contamination; and the drainage and ecological implications of Block A to be built in the NW corner [Known as The Dell]; about the traffic issues arising from its entrance/exit onto Carter Knowle Rd; and about the potential threat of overlooking of adjacent properties to the West on a private drive.

The scale of development.

The proposal for 67 flats on this small site looks rather like over-development. The Elderwood estate down the hill – on the old Bannerdale Centre site – has 64 houses, also varying between 2- and 3- bedrooms, but the site is much larger.

The Draft Sheffield Local Plan – currently being considered by the Government Inspector and not expected to become effective until this time next year – allowed for 14 houses on the Gospel Hall site. The current Council Plan allows for a Density Rate in this area for a site of that size of about 40-60 dwellings per hectare [dph] This application has a Density Rate of over 75dph.

In the Developer’s Design&Access Statement it justifies the high number of flats thus: “Close to the city centre, schemes are expected to deliver at least 70 dwellings per hectare (dph), with sites near to high-frequency bus routes in the urban areas delivering between 40 and 60 dph. It is considered that this site is in an extremely sustainable location and is proposed to deliver a density of approximately 76 dwellings per hectare.”

Comments. This site is nowhere near the city centre. And what high-frequency bus-routes are there? The No.6 bus runs at 1 per hour up to 7pm Monday to Saturday, with no service on Sundays; and its route is long and complicated from Millhouses Tesco to the city centre. No.719 is a school bus, with 2 journeys per day Mon-Fri; and does not usually pick up non-school passengers.

As an alternative example, an earlier development proposal for this site – see below – was for 22 units, comprising a mixture of 3- and 4- bedroom houses ranging from terrace-type town houses, to semi-detached and detached models. This would have delivered a density much more appropriate to the area [approx 45dph] , while allowing more green space and preserving the ecological and visual aspects of the site.

Affordable Housing.

I said in the November Bulletin that there was no proposal in the application for any affordable housing – which under current Council policy should make up about 30% of the apartments. Most planning applications in our area in the recent past have opted to offer the Council a sum of money [a “commuted sum”] instead towards building such housing elsewhere – an option that often allows the Council to get more for the money as the price of land may well be lower in other areas of the city. It does however tend to maintain and even increase the existing division between better-off areas in the West and South and those in the North and East. The South-West is particularly short of affordable housing, forcing many young people to look elsewhere.

The developers have now asserted that they cannot afford to include any affordable housing on the grounds that doing so would reduce their profits [The Viability Statement]. But according to the existing laws that assertion has been assessed by an independent company against what the developer might be expected to make in profit from the development – and that assertion has been found a little inadequate.

The independent assessor agrees that:

a) the developer is unable to support the full affordable housing commuted sum – which would have been around £3.3m. [equal to around 18 flats onsite]

b) However, the viability testing shows that the scheme is able to make an affordable housing commuted sum of £1,941,000 (equal to around 6% onsite affordable housing = 4 flats)

The assessment forecasts likely sales values for all 67 flats – allowing for “the unsettled market conditions” – to be around £33.5m. The developer’s reasonable costs were assessed at around £28.2m – giving them a profit of around £5m, which equals a profit rate of around 17.5%.

This does seem rather at odds with the assertion that “these proposals in a sustainable location will make a significant contribution to meeting current shortfalls in housing in the city” . Sheffield has a major shortage of affordable housing, to which the SW Area needs to make a fair contribution.

Other issues with the site.

Contamination.

The planning application for Mercia School exposed in great detail the risks from the previous landfill under the North side of the old Bannerdale Playing Fields site – necessitating special measures to prevent landfill gases etc. from escaping into the school etc. What was not explored was the extent to which this problem also affected the Gospel Church site immediately above the site to the West. The Planning Application for the Church site does acknowledge the possible presence of “contamination” but denies that it could affect the proposed flats etc.

The Gospel Church owners – Springvale Gospel Hall Trust – planned a development in 2020 which never became a Planning Application. As part of that a detailed Geo-Environmental Investigation was commissioned, which examined the known landfill to the South of Carter Knowle Rd from the 1950’s. It concluded that

a) there were moderate-to-high risks of “elevated gas escapes” from the landfill to the East of the site, but that the gas migration barriers inserted between the site and the school football pitches plus the gas vents accompanying them should be an effective barrier. Nevertheless the report recommended more investigation, especially as there were also possible unrecorded sources of contamination from earlier quarrying etc.

b) the culvert in the NW Dell section, issuing from a known spring, could be “an obstruction to future foundations”; and would also need more investigation.

The Dell – drainage and ecological issues.

The lowest part of the site – an old quarry in the NW corner known as The Dell – is proposed to have a building with 20 flats over the old stream which flows down under the School and the Park in a culvert, and eventually into the River Sheaf. This area also has a cesspit for the 4 houses above on the private drive, with the outflow going into the culvert. The Dell also has an ecological value for wildlife and habitat.

The Application makes no proposals for The Dell to deal with these – a matter of considerable concern for the inhabitants of the 4 houses above, and probably also for the Council’s Ecology Unit.

The Planning Officer has already made it clear he is unhappy with this part of the developer’s plans and wants the Dell building removed on the grounds of the drainage and the wildlife implications – although it is more likely that the developer will try to modify the plans to get them approved. Planning Officers do not have unlimited powers to force through such changes, so the developer may well succeed.

NB.This particular developer has a reputation in Nether Edge – where they built the Chelsea development on the old Omega Restaurant site – for being unwilling to take much account of community views.

Transport.

Another issue will be the traffic implications for entrance/exit off Carter Knowle Rd. The entrance itself is quite wide, but the road is narrow and often well-parked-up on the North side opposite the entrance. Given the increasing amount of traffic on the road already, especially during peak rush-hours, this could pose problems. The proposed flats have quite a generous parking provision at 150 places to serve 67 dwellings, so it might well generate quite a lot of traffic. We do welcome the proposal to pay for the installation of a new pedestrian crossing outside the site, as the South side of Carter Knowle Rd has no pedestrian footway, only a narrow grass-verge.

The Application’s Transport Assessment asserts that “the previous use of the Site [as the Gospel Church] would have created some peak hour movements and as such the (extra) impact on the highway network is not material”; and the Design & Access Statement translates this as ” the access served a large quantity of cars”. This is nonsense; the congregation met only twice a week and not during peak hours; and attendance had fallen to double figures for some considerable time, hence their decision to sell up and move.

The application also makes much of the provision of cycle facilities, and yet the Transport Assessment shows clearly that the site does not enjoy good access to any cycle routes; and given the steepness of the roads in that area and the absence of dedicated cycle-lanes locally it is unlikely that many potential residents will be tempted to abandon cars.

The Assessment also goes into great detail about the multifarious facilities available via pedestrian means, including supermarkets, schools, GP surgeries, parks etc. – all within 5- 30 minutes walk. Nowhere does mention the steepness of the roads etc. needed to be used to access these.

Overlooking.

Also at issue is the height of the blocks – which may give some inhabitants a view into the houses above – an issue called “overlooking” The Planning Officer has acknowledged this is an issue, and may well ask for some changes to prevent it.

The Group Position

The Group has not yet made any formal Objection, as we probably won’t be able to meet to discuss the issues and possibly vote on it before the application goes to the Planning Committee – likely to be in Feb/March. But we will lodge a Comment that raises the above issues, which will strengthen the Planning Officer’s position in asking for changes.

There is now a Petition objecting to this development on the Council website: worth having a read and signing if you agree with the objections.

Update – May 2025
When this Application finally came before the Committee late last year, the Planning Officer recommended Refusal, on the grounds that the developer [PTA Developments] was refusing to make include any Affordable Housing in the proposals, and was also refusing to make any financial contribution towards the Council being able to build such housing elsewhere.
The Committee agreed and refused the Application.

However our Group, along with many individuals, also objected on other grounds – see above. These were commented on by individual Councillors, who agreed with many of the objections: but were not included as grounds for the Refusal.

Recently PTA Developments have lodged an Appeal against the Refusal of permission with the Government Inspectorate. Because of the new Labour Government’s introduction of new housing targets nationally, Sheffield Council’s latest Housing Target has risen. This will make it more difficult for them to defend the Planning Committee’s refusal of permission.
We will be repeating our Objection to the Planning Inspector but it will carry less weight than previously.

4. Ecclesall Primary School & Planning Application for a Multi-Use Games Area.

Planning Portal Reference – 23/03296/FUL. A Link to the Planning Portal for this Application is HERE – you will need to register a Login for the site if you want to make a Comment or an Objection.

See the 30 November Bulletin – available in Archived Bulletins

No further information about this has been received from the School, which has informed the Planning Dept that more information and a possible amended application is likely.

This would create further delay to any Committee hearing.

Planning Portal Reference – 23/01882/FUL.

5.The Coach House, 306 Dobbin Hill, S11 7JG

A new Planning Application has been made, relating to this property at the top of Dobbin Hill, off Ringinglow Rd. Planning Reference 23/03216/FUL.

The application is from the owners of the Coach House, who want to take over and fence off what is clearly a grass verge alongside the public footway fronting their garden, [with a stone wall separating it from their existing garden], to incorporate it into their garden. They propose to plant trees on it, although some local residents believe they want to use it for parking.

There is no obvious reason why this particular section of grass verge should be different from other such verges on hundreds of other roads, which are under Council management, and are maintained by them, with occasional mowing etc: and there is no obvious reason why the Coach House owners thought they could just take it over. Since the applicant has not made any contact with the Planning Dept to discuss the application we can’t know how Planning might have reacted – but one would think they should have dismissed it out of hand. The application form admits that the space is not “vacant” – that is, it has an owner, the Council. However, the Application has been validated, that is it has been accepted as a reasonable one; so it may be that the owners have had discussions with the Council’s Property Services Unit about buying it – we don’t know.

There are a considerable number of objections from local residents to this application – mainly on the grounds that a) it is public property b) it is a useful area to allow pedestrians more space on a narrow piece of road and c) it allows a better view for traffic turning into Dobbin Hill from Ringinglow Rd. It is also pointed out that properly maintained it would have both bio-diversity and visual benefits for the local community; and it is claimed that its current rather dilapidated state is largely due to the owners persuading their builders to use it for parking.

It seems obvious that this application should not have been allowed in the first place, and to allow it to go forward sets an alarming precedent for other “land-grabs” of grass verges etc. elsewhere. On this ground alone it should be dismissed, and the Group will lodge a Comment to that effect.

FEEDBACK

As usual we are happy to receive feedback by the way of queries, comments and suggestions re any of the above.

We may not be able to hold a Community Meeting in time to discuss some of these, and to have a formal decision on whether to make an Objection, or make a more neutral Comment – so views on this would be helpful for the Committee to reach a decision on this.

BULLETIN – published 1 January 2024

Hi All – a very Happy [and hopefully drier] New Year to all our members. Plus a January WhatsOn – courtesy of our friends Banner Cross Neighbourhood Group, with a couple of event posters.

Also - Friends of Carterknowle Park Annual General Meeting, 

25th January 2024 7pm at Mercia School

Best Wishes from myself and the Committee

Mike

Post Feedback

Back to Home Page