|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 15, 2015 11:42:57 GMT
All four floors must be flats ! How else would they fit 42 into such a small space !
|
|
|
Post by teddyowner on Jun 15, 2015 12:11:27 GMT
All four floors must be flats ! How else would they fit 42 into such a small space ! There will be couple of individual flats over the entrances to the courtyards, probably be approx. 38 to 40 flats split between the 2 blocks. That does seem a lot to squeeze into 3 floors
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 15, 2015 12:23:14 GMT
Would it work out at 5 flats per floor per. Block?
That's still a lot considering the size of the flats. They are big compared to the houses but for flats they are tiny. Our old development of flats had about 20 and it was ugly and massive ! The flats were still tiny ! So for know what these will be like. Probabaly a cooker and a sink and a bed. With a built in toilet!
|
|
|
Post by chris1983 on Jun 15, 2015 12:41:32 GMT
maybe i am looking at the wrong plans/flyer but surely all the grey area behind etc flat divided into what looks like 21 little boxes is the parking for the flats?
maybe i just miss read the flyer that was posted....
But i can fully appreciate that you don't want a towering block of flats right outside your door.
We did read somewhere that there would be higher rise buildings on the development but i got the impression it would be further down towards the lake, where the gorund starts to dip down anyway so you would notice as much from a distance.
|
|
|
Post by nightowl on Jun 15, 2015 12:43:53 GMT
I feel for you not wanting those houses, but with my realistic head on, new estates consist of 2 and 3 storey houses, mixed together, and there are plenty around this very estate already, so although it's not what was wanted by some, I can see why it would get approved... I wish it had not for all you people who didn't want it. However, 4 storeys is another matter, with tons of cars and visitors, and massive buildings, far worse than 3 storey spaced out family homes, and many people have bought around them without any warning they were coming.... regardless of people's opinions on the success rate of previous objections, people who have an issue with the plan should reject it and register their objections in my opinion... "3 storey spaced out homes" ... did you see the plans? Its a brick wall of 3 storeys all crammed into a strip overlooking already existing houses with their 2nd floor rear living rooms ... the houses per hectare is also a much higher proportion than anywhere else on the estate thus far. We also purchased without any warning of this brick wall so I dont see any difference! I think its a bit of an exagerration with tons of visitors and their cars etc ... I cant see it being that much of an issue. The height is the bigger issue. When I said spaced out, I mean they are not a terrace with no gaps, they are an exact continuation of the houses on Highfield Lane (like the ones Spencer is in), and so although I have sympathy, I think it is different... Put it another way, would you swap those approved plans for replacement plans which meant you backed on to 42 four storey apartments? Like I said before, I do honestly feel for you because it's not what you wanted, but I don't think we should make every new planning app about the plans for the strip known as 1h And what happened there. The land on which Barratt have applied for this is marked as 3 storey on the master plan, so it seems they are breaking it's constraints... I will be submitting opposition when the plans are live
|
|
|
Post by teddyowner on Jun 15, 2015 13:28:05 GMT
maybe i am looking at the wrong plans/flyer but surely all the grey area behind etc flat divided into what looks like 21 little boxes is the parking for the flats? maybe i just miss read the flyer that was posted.... But i can fully appreciate that you don't want a towering block of flats right outside your door. We did read somewhere that there would be higher rise buildings on the development but i got the impression it would be further down towards the lake, where the gorund starts to dip down anyway so you would notice as much from a distance. It's a bit hard to see on an A5 size flyer but I'd say the 6 spaces in the central courtyard are for the 2 and a half storey terraces. (6 of them) There are 16 spaces in each of the north and South courtyards ( 4 flats On each of the 4 floors?) Looks like a pair of flats over each of the 3 courtyard entrances with their own spaces to the front and then another 2 pairs of flats elsewhere in the development (42 in total) Looks like one space per household and no provision for extras or visitors
|
|
|
Post by teddyowner on Jun 15, 2015 13:53:24 GMT
I have received this reply to my request for details of the proposed elevations, parking provisions and density per hectare of the development. Looks like they aren't telling.
Dear Peter,
Many thanks for your email.
I am awaiting all feedback following the leaflet distribution.
I will then review all comments with the Applicant and respond accordingly.
Regards,
My name isn't Peter so that's a nice personalised email reply.
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 15, 2015 14:12:49 GMT
Iv'e just rang this lady and asked her a few questions. it took all afternoon to be put through to her. apparently some of the fast aren't in the two 4 storey building some are actually to the rear right at the bottom. She counted them on her plans and said each flat has 1 space. The will mainly be 2 bedroom flats. i pointed out that this still meant no visitors parking,and thanks to teddy owner i could slap her with the each flat needs 50% for visitors too. She seemed a bit quiet at that point. then i emailed her whilst on the phone the picture of the allocations of land from harworth estates that say this particular area of land they are proposing for development was initially planned to be a maximum of 3 storeys,, again she went quiet and confused but agreed it was this said piece of land. she will send elevations after the plans have been finalised.
i asked what would it take for them to change the plans etc, but she said there was no tipping point, but that barret will meat with the council and view the planning comments. i asked her to request that barret hold an evening with a councillor present just because they are trying to build an extra storey than the residents were told would be there. she said that all she can do is put that point forward, and that a consolation evening doesn't usually happen on an estate this big, but again i reminded her that the area is only meant to be a 3 storey, and i think its the least they could do if they are just going to rock up and build a tower.
hope this answers some questions. still didn't answer a lot of my concerns.
however the councillor did email me back saying that hed arranged a visit with planning to of through the details and will get back shortly.
|
|
|
Post by teddyowner on Jun 16, 2015 8:52:16 GMT
Interesting that someone suggested that the builders,the council and Harworth all piss in the same pot. Harworth and Barratts have both used John R Paley to provide their plans. Funny how on the aspirational images that Harworth have used there isn't a four storey building in sight and the parking courtyards on Wensley Road and the new one being built by Harron on Oakdene Way are both similar to the image showing how it shouldn't be done on page 53 linkPage 31 is interesting ... the document is dated March 2013. Purchasers on Bradfield Way were told that the land behind was to be green space. Looking at that illustration the land was earmarked for 3-4 storey all along ... Here's the link to the updated plan updated 2014 masterplanMainly changes to planned traffic flow and build densities, but fig.13 backs up what Anonymous said about the strip of land on Lescar Road always having being set aside for housing.
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 16, 2015 13:52:18 GMT
Does it still say it's only meant to be max 3 storeys ?
|
|
|
Post by nightowl on Jun 16, 2015 23:06:06 GMT
Interesting that someone suggested that the builders,the council and Harworth all piss in the same pot. Harworth and Barratts have both used John R Paley to provide their plans. Funny how on the aspirational images that Harworth have used there isn't a four storey building in sight and the parking courtyards on Wensley Road and the new one being built by Harron on Oakdene Way are both similar to the image showing how it shouldn't be done on page 53 linkPage 31 is interesting ... the document is dated March 2013. Purchasers on Bradfield Way were told that the land behind was to be green space. Looking at that illustration the land was earmarked for 3-4 storey all along ... Just looked at this document. Don't pages 19, 22 and 24 indicate this strip of land behind Bradfield way was originally planned for mixed use? it's not been earmarked residential all along by the looks of it. The masterplan evolves all the time dependent on harworth and the demand, the builders then buy land from Harworth, it would not be Harrons decision to change the use of the strip of land. It seems Harron only bought that land recently when it was changed to residential use from the mixed use centre... I believe this probably relates to masterplan update in the news which I've linked to below (but could have been an earlier update, see the second link)... what would have been behind you seems to be going up where the playground is in theory (if anything other than housing ever happens on here). Basically it's always evolving until it's set in stone www.rothbiz.co.uk/2015/04/news-4158-waverley-plans-updated-again.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Rothbiz+%28Rothbiz%3A+Rotherham+Business+News%292nd link www.rothbiz.co.uk/2014/08/news-4686-waverley-masterplan-set-for.html?m=1
|
|
|
Post by davsur on Jun 16, 2015 23:58:28 GMT
I'll get these printed out. Great help.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2015 19:51:16 GMT
Page 31 is interesting ... the document is dated March 2013. Purchasers on Bradfield Way were told that the land behind was to be green space. Looking at that illustration the land was earmarked for 3-4 storey all along ... Just looked at this document. Don't pages 19, 22 and 24 indicate this strip of land behind Bradfield way was originally planned for mixed use? it's not been earmarked residential all along by the looks of it. The masterplan evolves all the time dependent on harworth and the demand, the builders then buy land from Harworth, it would not be Harrons decision to change the use of the strip of land. It seems Harron only bought that land recently when it was changed to residential use from the mixed use centre... I believe this probably relates to masterplan update in the news which I've linked to below (but could have been an earlier update, see the second link)... what would have been behind you seems to be going up where the playground is in theory (if anything other than housing ever happens on here). Basically it's always evolving until it's set in stone www.rothbiz.co.uk/2015/04/news-4158-waverley-plans-updated-again.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Rothbiz+%28Rothbiz%3A+Rotherham+Business+News%292nd link www.rothbiz.co.uk/2014/08/news-4686-waverley-masterplan-set-for.html?m=1Looking through all the documentation ... It appears it was originally meant to be 3-4 storey commercial\mixed use prior to May 2014. As of May 2014 it appears to have changed from 3-4 storey commercial\mixed use to Residential. Either way a poor sales tactic by Harron (sales) informing potential buyers it was earmarked as green space especially when there were these plans which I'm sure they had! Not sure what I think to the the so called central area being moved to North of the estate, surely any amenities would best serve the town in a central position!
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 17, 2015 20:48:30 GMT
I spoke today with rotherham planning department who were less than helpful and said even if they have 1000'S of objections if they think it's not a problem then it could go ahead.
I just wondering if there are many people on here that are planning on objecting, and just thought when it's time to object it could be an idea to attach the image from the design strategy booklet showing that the land was meant for 3 storey max.
I Rekon if enough people sent an objection along side with the picture of the booklet it could have a little more importance?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2015 20:57:57 GMT
Dont think attatching anything will change their minds, they will already be aware of what was planned before etc. The council have told Harworth and developers to build more densely as the predicted population will not be met at the current rate or now previous rate.
|
|