Restorations – 12 ‘disused’ sites for thousands of homes in Sheffield to ease housing crisis UK News

The council has set aside seven previously used plots which could provide 2,836 homes – houses and flats – in areas such as Neepsend, Park Hill, Attercliffe and West Bar.

Five more are being developed on Kelham Island, Devonshire Borough, Shirecliffe, Attercliffe and Norfolk Park.

The authority is bidding more than £14million to buy old buildings and pay for cleanups, demolition and renovations to kick off projects on land which, in some cases, has been abandoned for years.

The money comes from the government’s Brownfield Housing Fund and is administered by the South Yorkshire Mayor’s office. He received £40m in 2020 and a further £13.45m this month to pay for projects across the county.

Ministers have set Sheffield a target of building more than 53,000 homes by 2039.

Sheffield architect and homebuilder David Cross said there were ‘literally no’ plots in the city’s popular south-west.

In the east there was an ‘abundance’ of brownfields – but new homes were often not viable as construction costs exceeded the value of sales – so subsidies were needed before projects could start .

If approved, the initial seven Sheffield sites would create:

902 homes in Attercliffe Waterside: £4.08m grant for ‘enabling works’ under £205m scheme

700 houses in Hoyle Street: £1.2m for ‘land acquisition and assembly’

369 homes in West Bar: £655,000 for highways and infrastructure works

120 houses in Allen Street: £434,000 for ‘acquisition and preparatory’ works

200 homes in Porter Brook: £350,000 for demolition

The reports also cite five other projects: ‘Devonshire Quarter’, ‘Norfolk Park 10’, ‘Shirecliffe 2’, ‘Attercliffe: Workshop Road/Titterton Close’ and ‘Little Kelham’.

The Star has contacted Sheffield City Council and the Mayor’s Office for further details.

But tight government deadlines pose problems. Some £20million must be spent by this month or it could be clawed back.

In January, mayoral officials warned they could lose £17million due to plans ‘slipping off’.

They had encountered “profound challenges” in designing schemes that provided quality homes while being good value for money, as measured by the government.

Officials were “engaging” with the government to seek flexibilities, noting “the strong pipeline of programs that are currently moving forward”.

A report to the MCA Housing and Infrastructure Board meeting on Tuesday March 15 updates progress saying ‘approved commitments’ now stood at £17.6m against the target of £20m sterling.

Mr Cross, architect and director of Sheffield-based Sky-House Builders, said he supported grants for brownfield sites.

He added: “It can be difficult to stack – we have a lot of old industrial works that may have been in one family for decades with old engineering works in dilapidated buildings.

“Trying to relocate businesses to newer buildings and move heavy machinery is again expensive and complex.

“We have a planning system that ‘taxes’ permissions with the Community Infrastructure Tax, Affordable Housing and other Section 106s which all add to construction costs, reducing viability.

“Add that to asbestos removal, demolition and pollutant disposal in the ground, you can see why so many developments are stalling after so much PR fanfare.

“I support subsidies for brownfield regeneration. However, I would say that some private landowners will benefit from these subsidies when in reality their land value should be zero or even negative!

“I would support attendance at Attercliffe where we have a serious opportunity to create a major new urban village with all the right ingredients – a canal, a tram, new world-class facilities around the Olympic Heritage Park and more. .

“Salford Quays has reinvented itself with major ambition and I don’t see why Attercliffe couldn’t do the same.

“The reopening of rivers, the assembly of land for delivery or the cleaning of land to reduce risks must be encouraged. Similarly, the establishment of infrastructure for development should be encouraged. It’s central government funding and…