I agree with your comments on the new car park, and the new entrance for the campus !!! (what is that all about) why was money spent on a perfectly good car park surely this could have been put to more productive use, coming into Killamarsh under the old railway bridges is an absolute disgrace, I am born and bred in Killamarsh and have seen good changes but mostly bad decisions made, boarded up shops, litter soaked pathways, and more houses for familes meaning more teenagers with nothing to do but stand around street corners getting drunk and generally littering the place up with empty bottles and such. I used to be proud to say I came from Killamarsh not any more this ghetto is getting worse and worse.

There is now only one entrance and exit; 

Minor point but there has only ever been one entrance – it’s simply been moved from Sheffield Road to Stanly Street i.e. from a major road to a side road. It still has two lanes however so presumably vehicles can follow the one way system round the car park and your emergency vehicle enter as well. I agree the layout is poor but suggest that’s a traffic calming measure to stop vehicle speeding in and out – I suspect things would be different if an emergency vehicle with siren was obtaining access as other vehicles tend to give them priority. The closing of the Sheffield Road entrance also released some land for house build and the money generated is intend to go back into the coffers.

I also understand that the final phase of the Master Plan was to incorporate an additional exit on to Nethermore Drive. I imagine that will raise a few complaints from the residents living there. How do RROKA stand on that one? Would you support their complaint or off set that in favour your wish that the Sports Centre should have 2 entrance/exits?

The sanctioning of more houses is unbelievable, just look at the state of the bus shelters and infrastructure for instance, eroding away, the bottom of bridge street with its boarded up shops, the canal, the roads, the bridges which look an absolute disgrace when you drive into killamarsh, We could do with a bank or even a petrol station, US!.

Gosh so much to reply to

1) Sanctioning of more houses? Can you tell us where and what these are?
2) Bus shelters – I understand that it has been announced that money has been allocated to replace these this year
3) Boarded up shops – these are presumably commercial properties and I would imagine the owners would be far happy having tennants than an empty shop – how could public money be better spent here?
4) The canal – there are already plans in place to bring the canal through the village, it was incorporated in the Options 2 and 3 above. The Canal Trust are pushing to get this funded and in place. It is already up to Kiveton and work is being carried out from Renishaw to Chesterfield. Killamarsh is the lock (excuse the pun) that opens up the whole Retford to Chesterfield route.
5) Bank – again commercial development – considering the closure of banks througout the country I would doubt any would be interested
6) Petrol stations? The cheapest petrol around is 2 miles away at Halfway, the nearest is at Holbrook – do you think any commercial company would see a market in the village – plus where would you build it?

…as for saying we the local tax payer has’nt paid for this, who pays into the european community fund… US!.

Well you havent paid for it from “local taxes” the point I was trying to make was that it had come from either Parish, District or County funding. I understand that the UK pays £4 billion into the EU (that will come out of your PAYE) assuming 26million people in work that’s £153 each. What’s it cost to join a golf club these days? I bet it’s more.

oh and can I ask why the last post now says “Your comment is awaiting moderation.” are all posts “moderated” before they get published?

Thank you for commenting and updating the residents. You seem to be saying that the residents of killamarsh have not paid for anything, then you say they have paid £153 each.I do not know if you are aware that a certain amount of parish funds comes out of the council tax which the residents have to pay. As for the golf club payment the residents have a choice to pay that, they don’t with the council tax.

The question you asked in the OP was “who has paid for this?” – I am well aware that the Parish Precept is added to the Council Tax however apparently no monies have been used from that funding. I informed you where the money had come from – The European Community – as a comparison I calculated for you what each tax payers pay on average for that membership – I was not suggesting that we have each paid £153 towards the car park. That money would have been paid over whether the car park had been funded or not.

The boarding up of the shops are the roller shutters, that have to be pulled down at closing time because of the vandals that makes killamarsh look like you want to drive straight through without stopping..

Apologies I thought you were referring to empty shops – in relation to this topic, the funding of the car park, how do you suggest money could have been spent better so that we don’t have shutters on the shops? Even better how do you think the council have any responibilty for the action of vandals – presummably they are real residents of Killamarsh.

As for the canal it has been at the planning stage for at least 6 years to our knowledge we are checking if it goes any further.It only took Kiveton and renishaw 3 years to get it under way. We are sure a bank would help populate the shopping area of Killamarsh

The final plans for the route through the village and the engineering solution to get through Rother Valley and how to deal with the collapsed Norwood Tunnel were actual presented to the Electors Meeting in 2008. The reason Killamarsh will be the last element of the canal to be completed is that it is the hardest (and most expensive) stretch. It has to cross under the M1, however that structure has already been incorporated in the recent road widening on there.

Yes we have to have a moderation process because of the irate residents, these are the ones that tell it like it is, that is why for every one we publish ten cannot its a shame because there is some real dooses that would get our lawyers on there toes.Keep the comments coming we love reading them and we do hold them on file for a period of time thanx. RROKA

Crikey 9 in 10 post don’t get published because of legal issues, I assume because you consider there content to be libelous, why else wouldnt you publish them? Apart from you and me and a handfull of other people there isnt really a lot that’s been posted I’m intrigued to know what else the Real Residents members have to complain about that warrants you decision to censor 9 in 10 posts?

Crikey 9 in 10 post don’t get published because of legal issues, I assume because you consider there content to be libelous, why else wouldnt you publish them? Apart from you and me and a handful of other people there isnt really a lot that’s been posted I’m intrigued to know what else the Real Residents members have to complain about that warrants you decision to censor 9 in 10 posts?

A technical response to your question would be:

If a comment is posted it will await moderation by RROKA admin, ALL comments are moderated for language and control. The content of the comment will be posted despite the viewpoint of the commenter as long as it falls within the etiquette rules of RROKA’s commenting policy. Hope this answer helps.

Francis said:

The boarding up of the shops are the roller shutters, that have to be pulled down at closing time because of the vandals that makes killamarsh look like you want to drive straight through without stopping..

Apologies I thought you were referring to empty shops – in relation to this topic, the funding of the car park, how do you suggest money could have been spent better so that we don’t have shutters on the shops? Even better how do you think the council have any responibilty for the action of vandals – presummably they are real residents of Killamarsh.

Yes the council have duty to stop vandals as they keep putting in the leader newspaper that they are tackling anti social behaviour so if they have not got a duty to tackle the vandals why do they print this.

Web Developer said:

A technical response to your question would be:

If a comment is posted it will await moderation by RROKA admin, ALL comments are moderated for language and control. The content of the comment will be posted despite the viewpoint of the commenter as long as it falls within the etiquette rules of RROKA’s commenting policy. Hope this answer helps.

My comments just go straight on instantly, is that because you have changed the comment place to the forum now? I take it you will be moderating comments AFTER they have been posted now! Fair Enuff!

Francis said:

As for the canal it has been at the planning stage for at least 6 years to our knowledge we are checking if it goes any further.It only took Kiveton and renishaw 3 years to get it under way. We are sure a bank would help populate the shopping area of Killamarsh

The final plans for the route through the village and the engineering solution to get through Rother Valley and how to deal with the collapsed Norwood Tunnel were actual presented to the Electors Meeting in 2008. The reason Killamarsh will be the last element of the canal to be completed is that it is the hardest (and most expensive) stretch. It has to cross under the M1, however that structure has already been incorporated in the recent road widening on there.

The killamarsh stretch of the canal will be the most expensive because of the filling in, the building on, and the digging away. Renishaw, Kiveton, Shireoaks, Retford all kept most of there canal stretches open for easy working.

Why is all  money being spent on the leisure centre, when we have got a dried up canal bed which in its time was an engineering marvel, which was also a lifeline of the village in bygone days, and in this day and age would be an accet to the whole community to be used for fishing walking and most of all tourism which would bring much needed money to the village. I has been said in previous posts that it would be the most expensive to reinstate as a working canal. I would like to state that if it was not for the powers that be at the time, the selling off for housing and filling in of the canal, would not have been done and it would have been a simple task of just filling it up with water SIMPLE. How much longer do we have to listen to empty promises of it being reinstated. Chamberlain said let there be peace in our time I say let there be a canal in OUR TIME.

Also Hitler promised peace in Europe when he met Chamberlain, shows how easy you can fool somebody. Lets hope the council are not fooling us it does seem to be taking a long time

ROOSTER said:

Why is all  money being spent on the leisure centre, when we have got a dried up canal bed which in its time was an engineering marvel, which was also a lifeline of the village in bygone days, and in this day and age would be an accet to the whole community to be used for fishing walking and most of all tourism which would bring much needed money to the village. I has been said in previous posts that it would be the most expensive to reinstate as a working canal. I would like to state that if it was not for the powers that be at the time, the selling off for housing and filling in of the canal, would not have been done and it would have been a simple task of just filling it up with water SIMPLE. 

I'm sure the members of the Chesterfield Canal Trust would be happy to explain why it wouldnt have been as easy as you suggest – there are a few more (and expensive) problems that have occured since the canal became defunct in 1905 (after the collapse of The Norwood Tunnel) building of the M1, removal of road bridges (Bridge Street), new roads (Walford Road). 

Hindsight is a lovely thing to have but you have to be realistic about how it will be reinstated, how long it will take and how much it will cost.

As for the selling off bits for housing  – I believe that the canals in this country belong to British Waterways and presummably they would have received the money.  It must be over 20 years ago when this happened and if they were selling off the land I can't imagine that any one in a planning authority would have objected on the grounds that it was a lost asset – it handn't been in use for over 75 years by then. It will now be British Waterways who will be funding some of the cost of the restoration and they are spending billions in the whole country.

The projected cost to complete our bit – including new locks to take the canal up to Wales and Kiveton (originally there were 13 on this stretch) – is £10 to £20million  dependent on what are referred to as known and unknown risks (they unknowns have been costed but if they don't happen then its the lower figure.

I have walked the route  of the canal all the way to Chesterfield and there has been very little development on it's path from Killamarsh over to Chesterfield – some new housing in Renishaw and the the Trans Pennine footpath over at Stavely – a lot of the area is now open field with the canal having been filled in but as you suggest that would be the simple option to expose the original puddle clay lining and re-fill.  The route through Killamarsh was always the greatest engineered bit (roads, bridges, locks etc) and that is why it's the most expensive.

Hindsight comes with good forward thinking and the council of yesteryear had none

Some interesting reading from the Chesterfield Canal Trust about the history of the restoration, dates when the campaign was started and which specific authorities initially objected to the restoration.

“On the far side of the Norwood Tunnel in Derbyshire, the canal had been sold off by British Waterways to a variety of different owners. These included many private landowners, although small sections in Killamarsh were owned by North East Derbyshire District Council and Chesterfield Borough Council acquired a section near Staveley. More significanlty however, the four mile section between Chesterfield and Staveley, after years of negotiations, passed into the hands of Derbyshire County Council in 1987.

This section, unlike most of the section between Staveley and the Norwood Tunnel which was derelict at the best and filled in or built over at the worst, was still in water owing to the statutory duty of the canal's owners to supply water via the canal to Staveley Works. The County Council's motive in purchasing it in 1987 was more connected to preventing the canal interfering with the proposed Staveley-Brimington bypass than with any motive related to canal restoration. The bypass proposals intended to block the canal in five places by repeated crossings of the canal, supported by a Council decision in 1983 which stated that “the additional costs of restoring the Chesterfield Canal to a navigable waterway cannot be justified, and is, therefore, not promoted”. The Canal Society's document 'A Future for the Chesterfield Canal', published in 1985, concurred with this with its vision of the canal as a truncated series of linear ponds.

After testing the strength of public feeling, the Society soon changed track, and began a long campaign to ensure that the bypass, if built, would accommodate navigation on a restored Chesterfield Canal. The first Seminar on the Future of the Chesterfield Canal, organised by the Canal Society in March 1988 at Worksop Town Hall, provided for the first time an occasion when representatives of all the local authorities, statutory and non-statutory bodies, voluntary groups and all concerend with the canal could begin to imagine the prospect of a restored canal, and see how the various pieces might fit together. It was a significant date in the history of the Chesterfield Canal, and over one hundred invited delegates left the seminar at the end of the day with a new vision of what opportunities a restored Chesterfield Canal offered.

Massive public support harnessed by the Canal Society to restore the canal to full navigation resulted in a 14000 signature petition which was presented to the County Council opposing the blocking of the canal by the Staveley-Brimington bypass, and gradually official opinions changed. The County Council allowed the Canal Society to begin work on the restoration of Tapton Lock in Chesterfield. This was a carefully chosen project, as the lock is in a clearly visible position from passing traffic on the busry A61, and was accessible to the public – a good 'shop window' for local people to see the enthusiasm of our volunteer workforce, and the transformation of this lock from dereliction to living heritage. The chamber, a grade 2 listed building was emptied of decades of silt and debris, the structure repaired and gated, and in the Society's greatest moment of triumph to date, the lock was formally opened on April 29th 1990. This achievement was recognised when in 1991 the Chesterfield Canal Society was the worthy recipient of Derbyshire County Council's major Greenwatch Award of £1000, together with the Christopher Power prize from the Inland Waterways Association. This was followed in 1992 by the Society jointly winning the Kenneth Goodwin Award from the Inland Waterways Association for the restoration achieved.

In Derbyshire the County Council was successful in its application for a similar Derelict Land Grant which culminated in the restoration of the first section of the canal from its junction with the River Rother in Chesterfield to Tapton Lock, completed in 1994. In the same year the County Council pulished its Recreational Strategy for the canal in its ownership, and the four councils to the west of the tunnel became signatories to the Strategy for the Protection and Restoration of the Chesterfield Canal.
Succeeding years brought a string of successes for the Canal Society in Derbyshire. 1995 saw the opening of a completely new Dixon Lock, designed by the Society to replace the original that was lost in opencasting, and financed largely by British Coal Opencast. The same year saw the completion of the engineering study, financed largely by English Partnerships and undertaken by Sir William Halcrow and Partners, which identified the cost of restoration between Chesterfield and the Norwood Tunnel at about £20m. The study also suggested engineering solutions of the main problem in Derbyshire, the passage of Killamarsh, where 22 houses had been built on the original line. This year the Christopher Powell Prize once again was awarded to the canal Society for its restoration work, and there was final confirmation from the County Council that the Staveley-Brimington bypass, if built, would not block the canal. The Society's volunteers achieved the opening of Bluebank Lock the next year, leaving only detailed work on Wheeldon Mill Lock to complete before all of Derbyshire's locks were restored – a magnificent achievement for a totally volunteer workforce. The contribution of the voolunteers of theWaterway Recovery Group in assisting on these works must be gratefully acknowledged. A Phase 2 grant to Derbyshire County Council permitted restoration of the canal from Tapton Lock in Chesterfield to Staveley and was completed in 1997, leaving only three road blockages awaiting removal before through navigation on this four mile section could commence.

Exciting though the achievements of these hectic years have been, substantial problems still remain to secure the finance for the restoration of the remaining ten miles of derelict canal in Derbyshire. While most of the restoration remaining is relatively straightforward there are significant problems – the collapsed Norwood Tunnel, the thirteen derelict locks of the Norwood Flight, the need to circumvent by substantial lock flights the blockages at Killamarsh, the lowered railway track at Staveley, substantial mining subsidence that has played havoc with the canal levels in Derbyshire, and negotiations with the many private owners of this section of canal. These are the problems that have been addressed by the Partnership Working Party since 1995, and which it is anticipated will culminate in a Heritage Lottery bid not only to complete the massive restoration task through to Chesterfield, but also to finance the imaginative link, proposed by the Chesterfield Canal Society, to make the River Rother navigable from Killamarsh to Rotherham. By providing a link from this new river navigation into the Chesterfield Canal at Killamarsh, a cruising ring of about 100 miles would be opened up using Yorkshire's waterway system”

It would appear that whilst it is taking time a lot of good work has been done by the various authorities involved and unless some one has a complete re-think on the whole canal through the village plan I would suggest that it will happen.

Thank you Francis very interesting reading,I for one would love to see the old canal restored fully

What has happened to the european funding that we supposed to have got for the restoration of the canal some people say it has been spent, now there's a surprise