Councillors will decide on two major developments that could provide homes for hundreds of people in Sheffield over the next few years.
Two housing sites have been recommended for approval by council planning officers ahead of Tuesday’s committee meeting.
The first is in East Bank Road, Norfolk Park, where the old East Hill primary and secondary schools once stood.
Sigma Capital Group and Sheffield Housing Company want to build 77 three- and four-bedroom homes there.
And in Halfway, Taylor Wimpey wants to build 207 homes next to the Arnold Laver building off Oxclose Park Road, filling in a gap in the new housing estate.
Outline permission for a residential development was granted in 2015.
Neither application has proved particularly controversion. There was only one objection to the Norfolk Park site, from Replicast Ltd. The manufacturing firm, based near the site, said the development was ‘guaranteed to cause a significant impact to our business’.
It said homes would have to be built near its premises, which generates ‘noise, waste and odours’.
The objection says: “To build new homes directly adjacent to the boundary will result in owners complaining to the council about the company, despite it being there for over 50 years.”
Replicast also raised concerns about loss of light and subsidence. But officers said there would not be any issues. They said noise from the firm’s site was ‘was not particularly audible or problematic, although some plant and equipment could be heard’, and that double glazing would help reduce it further.
Officers added: “The site is previously developed land in need of redevelopment and the proposal will change this space into a new high-quality residential environment.”
The developer will pay £40,000 towards improving open space either at St Aidan’s playing field or Arbourthorne playing field.
There were seven objections to the Halfway development, raising concerns about traffic, lack of new play facilities, and impact on local schools.
The Arnold Laver business based next door did not object but submitted several comments aimed at ‘ensuring that the proposed residentialdevelopment does not constrain the operations of their existing business, which would put at risk future investment and jobs’.
Planning officers said the proposals were acceptable and would be a ‘high-quality modern housing development contributing towards delivering the council’s housing targets’.