Transformation and Sustainability
SHEFFIELD LOCAL PLAN
(formerly Sheffield Development Framework)
CITY POLICIES AND SITES
DOCUMENT
EAST
COMMUNITY ASSEMBLY AREA
AREAS AND SITES
BACKGROUND REPORT
Development Services
Sheffield City Council
Howden House
1 Union Street
SHEFFIELD
S1 2SH
June 2013
CONTENTS
Chapter
1.
Page
Introduction
1
Part 1: Lower Don Valley Core Strategy Sub area
Covers: Darnall Ward (excluding Handsworth)
2.
Lower Don Valley Policy Areas
19
3.
Lower Don Valley Allocated Sites
83
Part 2: South East Urban Core Strategy Sub area
Covers: Manor Castle Ward, Arbourthorne Ward, Richmond Ward,
and part of Darnall Ward (at Handsworth). A small part lies within the
South East Community Assembly Area report )
4.
South East Urban Policy Areas
173
5.
South East Urban Area Allocated Sites
227
1
INTRODUCTION
The Context
1.1
This report provides evidence to support the published policies for the City
Policies and Sites document of the Sheffield Local Plan.
1.2
The Sheffield Local Plan is the new name, as used by the Government, for what
was known as the Sheffield Development Framework. It is Sheffield’s statutory
development plan, which the local planning authority is required by law to
produce.
1.3
The Local Plan includes the Core Strategy, which has already been adopted,
having been subject to formal public examination. It sets out the vision and
objectives for the Local Plan and establishes its broad spatial strategy.
1.4
The City Policies and Sites document now supplements this, containing:
-
1.5
Criteria-based policies to inform development management and design
guidance
Policy on land uses appropriate to a range of area types across the city
Allocations of particular sites for specific uses
The document was originally proposed to be two, City Policies and City Sites.
Both of these have already been subject to two stages of consultation:
-
Emerging Options
Preferred Options
1.6
The Emerging Options comprised the broad choices, which were drawn up to
enable the Council to consider and consult on all the possibilities early in the
process of drawing up the document 1. Having consulted on these options the
Council decided which to take forward as Preferred Options.
1.7
The Preferred Options were published and consulted on as the ones that the
Council was minded to take forward to submission 2. However, the choice of
option and the way it was expressed remained subject to public comment. The
Preferred Options document outlined how the Council had arrived at them and
the justification for choosing them. It also indicated which Emerging Options had
been rejected and why.
1
Emerging Options for City Policies, Sheffield City Council (February 2006) and Emerging Options for City
Sites, Sheffield City Council (February 2006) – see Sheffield City Council - Emerging Options 2006
2
Preferred Options for City Policies, Sheffield City Council (April 2007) and Preferred Options for City
Sites, Sheffield City Council (April 2007) – see Sheffield City Council - Preferred Options 2007
-1-
1.8
Work following the Preferred Options was delayed whilst priority was given to the
public examination of the Core Strategy. In the subsequent version, the
Consultation Draft 3, the policy areas and allocations were updated to reflect
changing circumstances. A further consultation was carried out on additional
sites for allocation.
1.9
The present version of the City Policies and Sites document has been published
as the Council’s final version, including additional allocations. This is for final
representations by stakeholders and other members of the public, followed by
submission to the Government and public examination. A schedule of changes
may be produced following representations and a final chapter will be added to
each Background Report to explain why the changes have been proposed.
1.10
The Background Reports set out the Council’s evidence for considering that the
policies are sound. That is the issue on which representations are invited, in line
with national policy. The policy document itself has space only to summarise the
reasons for the chosen policies and allocations. So, the more detailed evidence
and analysis is found in the Background Reports.
1.11
The Background Reports are not actually part of the Sheffield Local Plan but
contribute to the statutory process of preparing it. So they are not published as
the subject for representations though comments on the soundness of the area
designations and site allocations may well take up evidence or conclusions set
out in the Reports.
1.12
This Report supports the published policy areas and site allocations for the East
Community Assembly Area. Different Core Strategy Areas are dealt with in
distinct parts of the report, reflecting the underlying common factors for each
component of the spatial strategy.
1.13
For each subarea, there are chapters on:
•
•
•
1.14
Strategic Context
Policy Areas
Allocated Sites
Each section within these chapters deals with principal themes from the
soundness criteria:
• Consistency with national and other strategic policy
• Justification
• Effectiveness
• Conclusions – drawing together the strands under the four criteria for
soundness set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.
3
City Policies and Sites: Consultation Draft (May 2010) – see Sheffield City Council - City Policies and
Sites
-2-
1.15
There are many references in the report to policy areas. These are explained in
Part 2 of the City Policies and Sites document (chapter 11), which includes policy
H1. More detailed justification on the policy area types and their menus of land
uses is contained in the relevant Policy Background Reports as follows. This
applies across all areas of the city and is not repeated in each area report.
Policy Area
Policy Background Report
Business Areas
Economy and City Region
Business and Industrial Areas
Economy and City Region
Industrial Areas
Economy and City Region
General Employment Areas
Economy and City Region
Meadowhall Shopping Centre
Economy and City Region
University and College Areas
Economy and City Region
Housing Areas
Neighbourhoods
Central Housing Areas
Neighbourhoods
Flexible Use Areas
Neighbourhoods
District Centres
Neighbourhoods
Neighbourhood Centres
Neighbourhoods
Open Space Areas
Opportunities and Well-being
Waste Management Areas
Global Environment and Natural Resources
Countryside Areas: Green Belt
Character and Heritage
The Area
1.16
The East Area is split geographically into two main parts, and the structure of this
report reflects this split.
-3-
1.17
The northern part is identified in the Core Strategy as the Lower Don Valley 4. This
is dealt with in Part 1. The Core Strategy identifies the Lower Don Valley as a
strategic location for economic activity, acting as a focus for employment, leisure,
recreation and sporting activities, and these will be the main users of land. These
land uses benefit the whole city, but to support the Local Plan objective of
economic transformation in this area, investment in transport will be very
important. It will be a challenge to ensure that the Lower Don Valley is well
connected by all modes of transport to different parts of the city and city region to
enable people and goods to move about, whilst meeting objectives for reducing
impacts on the environment.
1.18
The southern part of the East Area forms part of the area identified in the Core
Strategy as the South East Urban Area. This is dealt with in Part 2. The area
consists primarily of several distinct residential areas where housing is the main
use of land. It includes some priority areas where land has been released for
new housing to encourage the revival of the housing market. The emphasis in
this area will be on supporting successful neighbourhoods, encouraging new
housing and a range of other uses to make these areas more sustainable places
in which to live.
1.19
There is a very small part of the East Community Assembly Area, (south of Linley
Lane and Normanton Spring Road) that falls within the Mosborough/Woodhouse
Core Strategy Area and this is covered by the South East Area Background
Report. Also a small industrial area at Olive Grove Road that falls within the
Sheaf Valley and Neighbouring Areas Core Strategy Area and this will be
covered by the South Area Background Report.
1.20
The Core Strategy spatial vision describes the outcome for the Lower Don Valley
as follows:
‘The Lower and Upper Don Valleys will complement the City Centre, as primary
locations for employment supported by a mix of related uses and providing for
developments not appropriate in the City Centre’ 5.
1.21
The policy area designations and allocation of sites in the Lower Don Valley
follow on directly from the area policies in the Core Strategy. The areas have
different characters and roles within the various parts of the valley and are
described as sub areas below. The Core Strategy policies have been developed
to meet the needs of each particular area of the Lower Don in the context of the
citywide spatial vision. The policy area designation and sites allocation proposed
within each sub-area are intended to help deliver the related Core Strategy policy.
1.22
The policy area designations and allocation of sites in the South East Urban Area
reflect the extensive priority areas for the release of new housing land, and an
4
5
Core Strategy Figure 5.1, page 30
Core Strategy, paragraph 4.2
-4-
emphasis on area regeneration. This aims to encourage the revival of the
housing market in parts of Sheffield where markets have been poor or nonexistent, and the improvement of neighbourhoods to create successful attractive
places to live. This is set out in the Core Strategy as the spatial vision for the
South East Urban Area 6 .
SUB AREAS
Lower Don Valley
1.23
In the Lower Don Valley five sub areas are identified. The areas are Meadowhall
(CS7 7), Tinsley Park (CS8 8), Attercliffe/Newhall, Parkway/Kettlebridge (both
CS9 9), and Attercliffe/Darnall (CS21, CS28, and CS35 10). These sub areas also
provide explanation for the broad pattern of policy areas within the LDV Core
Strategy area set out in Chapter 2.
Meadowhall
1.24
This sub-area includes the land at and around the Meadowhall Shopping Centre.
It broadly covers the area from the river at the north west of the shopping centre
to Sheffield Road to the south east, and from the motorway to the boundary with
the Sheffield Forgemasters site. Policy area designations and site allocations
within the Meadowhall sub-area have had regard to a number of considerations.
1.25
First, Core Strategy policy CS7 ‘Meadowhall’ proposes employment as the
predominant land use. The area has vacant land with good road and public
transport access. Policy designations in this area provide for those land uses that
are the most appropriate for vacant sites around the Meadowhall Shopping
Centre, including uses that will create economic opportunities for the city,
contribute to raising the quality of the area, attract further investment, and take
advantage of good public transport opportunities.
1.26
Second, this is the area most likely to generate uses intended to take advantage
of the closeness of the motorway. It will be essential to provide for land uses that
do not make congestion and air quality problems at Junction 34 worse, or can
include measures that can address impact at the outset.
1.27
Thirdly, policy CS7 was informed by the objectives of the Lower Don Valley
Vision and Masterplan for this part of the valley, which promotes a ‘mixed use’
6
Core Strategy, paragraph 4.19
Policy CS7 ‘Meadowhall’, Core Strategy, page 40
8
Policy CS8 ’Tinsley Park’, Core Strategy, page 42
9
Policy CS9 ‘Attercliffe/Newhall and Parkway/Kettlebridge’, Core Strategy, page 43
10
Policies CS21 ‘Boulevard of Sport’, Core Strategy, page 56; CS28 ‘Housing in Attercliffe and Darnall’,
page 69; and CS35 ’Darnall District Centre’, page 78
7
-5-
approach to bring new land uses into this area around Meadowhall 11. CS7
suggests that housing may be included as a part of mixed use development
around Meadowhall on sites closest to the Transport Interchange, once air quality
and other environmental conditions have improved. Land use designations
therefore need to consider opportunities for employment and housing uses.
1.28
The Proposals Map gives the Meadowhall Centre a unique ‘Meadowhall
Shopping Centre’ designation, reflecting its current use as a regional shopping
centre. The sites immediately around the centre are shown as Business Areas,
where a range of employment uses is acceptable without any preferences. See
Chapter 2 for more detailed explanation of policy area designations.
Tinsley Park, Attercliffe Newhall, and Parkway Kettlebridge
1.29
These areas represent the traditional industrial areas of the valley and share
broadly the same policy area designations within them. Core Strategy policies
CS8 ‘Tinsley Park’ and CS9 ‘Attercliffe/Newhall and Parkway/Kettlebridge’ show
the different economic role that these areas play within the city, and the site
allocations within these areas have regard to this.
1.30
Tinsley Park - This area covers the area east of the canal and Greenland Road
across to the city boundary and stretches from the motorway in the north to the
Tinsley Park Golf Club and High Hazels Park in the south. It includes the
Sheffield Business Park.
1.31
Attercliffe/ Newhall - This area covers the area to the north of Attercliffe Road
from the Forgemasters site in the north of the area to Savile Street in the south of
the area. It also includes the industrial area at Lumley Street in the south.
1.32
Parkway/Kettlebridge - This covers the area to the south of Darnall, between
the railway line and the Parkway.
1.33
Policy area designation and site allocations within these parts of the Lower Don
Valley Core Strategy area have taken on board the following issues:
•
Land uses need to reflect the business and industrial needs of the city (as
set out in the Sheffield Employment Sites Survey and the Employment
Land Review 12, and be in line with CS8 and CS9, which identify these
areas for industry and warehousing/distribution uses.
•
Site allocations for employment uses should reflect how accessible a site is
for employees or identify measures to address this.
11
Lower Don Valley Vision and Masterplan, 2005, Section 6.3. See: Sheffield City Council - Lower Don
Valley Masterplan 2005
12
See paragraph 3.7
-6-
•
1.34
At Tinsley Park the eastern edge of the area is located on the boundary
with Rotherham. Policy areas and site allocations should be consistent
with the designation across the boundary and vice versa.
The Proposals Map designates Industrial Areas or Business and Industrial Areas
within these Core Strategy sub areas. In Industrial Areas the preferred uses are
General Industry (B2) or Warehouses and Storage (B8). In Business and
Industrial Areas, Office and Non Office Business uses (B1a, b, and c) are also
preferred.
Attercliffe and Darnall
1.35
This sub-area covers the central part of the valley bottom and west Darnall from
the canal eastwards to Greenland Road and down to the railway line in the south.
It includes the Darnall residential area as far as the Parkway, eastwards along
Handsworth Road, and southwards along Prince of Wales Road to the Parkway.
It includes the Darnall District Centre.
1.36
Policy area designations and site allocations within the Attercliffe and Darnall subarea have taken on board the following considerations:
•
Land uses and site allocations need to reflect the regeneration aims as
set out in the Darnall, Attercliffe, and Tinsley Neighbourhood
Development Framework (DAT NDF) 13 for housing-led regeneration
around the canal (also see 1.45 below).
•
Darnall should be supported as an attractive, sustainable, safe place to
live in line with the vision for the area proposed in Core Strategy policy
CS28 ‘Housing in Darnall and Attercliffe’ 14.
•
District and Neighbourhood Centre boundaries should support the role
and function of the centres, in line with Core Strategy policy CS34 ‘ 15
which identifies the role and importance of District Centres and CS39 16
which identifies the role and importance of Neighbourhood Centres.
•
For Darnall District Centre, the boundary should also be compatible
with Core Strategy policy CS35 ‘Darnall District Centre’ 17 which
proposes that regeneration, renewal and expansion of the district
centre will be promoted to provide a wider range of retail and other
services.
13
Darnall, Attercliffe and Tinsley NDF (April 2007) Chapter 4.See: Sheffield City Council - Darnall
Attercliffe Tinsley NDF
14
Core Strategy, page 69
15
CS34 District Centres, Core Strategy, page 76
16
CS39 Neighbourhood Centres, Core Strategy, page 81
17
Core Strategy, page 78
-7-
1.37
The ‘Boulevard of Sport’ is a term adopted from the Lower Don Valley Vision and
Masterplan 18 (also see paragraph 1.40 below). It covers the central part of the
valley where a number of sport-related leisure uses have already been
established. It covers the area from the Meadowhall Retail Park to the Don
Valley Stadium and from Attercliffe Road/ Attercliffe Common to the canal. The
English Institute of Sport, Ice Sheffield, Don Valley Stadium and the Sheffield
Arena are all located here.
1.38
Policy area designations within this sub-area take on board the need to both
provide employment opportunities, and accommodate sport related leisure uses
in line with the objectives of Core Strategy policies CS15 ‘Locations for Large
Scale Leisure and Cultural Development’ 19 and CS21 ’The Boulevard of Sport’ 20.
These policies propose this area as an appropriate location for large-scale leisure
uses where they can benefit from the clustering of related activities.
1.39
These areas are shown on the Proposals Map broadly as a General Employment
Area for the central valley area relating to policy CS21; with Flexible Use Areas
around the canal, leading into Housing Areas in the existing established
residential areas towards, and including Darnall itself. Within the Flexible Use
and General Employment Areas no uses are preferred, this retains flexibility to
bring forward new land uses to assist in the regeneration of the area. The Darnall
District Centre and Attercliffe Neighbourhood Centre are both designated
accordingly; here retail uses and community facilities of appropriate scale to the
centres are the preferred uses.
Planning Strategies and Policies
The Lower Don Valley Vision and Masterplan (2005)
1.40
The Lower Don Valley Vision and Masterplan, 2005, was commissioned jointly by
the City Council and British Land PLC. The document covers the area broadly
covering the main transport, river and canal corridors including traditional
industrial areas in the valley, from the Don Valley Stadium at the southern end to
the Tinsley viaduct at the northern end.
1.41
It sets out a vision to guide the development of the Lower Don Valley over 20
years. One of the core objectives of the study was to provide a coherent planning
and urban design context to guide physical regeneration 21. The illustrative
masterplan 22 contained within the document divides the area into four districts:
Attercliffe Village, the Sport and Leisure Hub, the Central Zone, and the
18
Lower Don Valley Vision and Masterplan, 2005, page 68
Core Strategy, page 50
20
Core Strategy, page 56
21
Mission statement page iii
22
Illustrative Masterplan, page iv
19
-8-
Meadowhall Quadrant. These are consistent with the sub-area approach taken in
the Core Strategy and in this background report.
1.42
The City Council endorsed the principles of the Masterplan in 2005, and approved
the taking forward of the key elements for consideration as emerging options for
the Core Strategy 23. The land use scenarios within the four areas set out in the
Vision and Masterplan have, therefore, informed discussion on land use and site
allocations as they have been translated onto the Proposals Map. The range of
new land uses that the Masterplan proposes, for example, offices and new
housing, are largely consistent with the proposed policy area designations and
site allocations. This is explained in more detail in Chapter 2.
Housing Regeneration Areas (former Housing Market Renewal Areas)
1.43
Most of the Lower Don Valley formed part of the former Transform South
Yorkshire Housing Market Renewal (HMR) area and fell within the boundary of its
East Area Development Framework. The two Area Development Framework
documents described below have implications for land use and site allocations in
the valley and have guided the choices proposed. Although the national HMR
programme has ceased, the ADFs continue to provide a relevant framework for
guiding housing renewal and regeneration in the area, and are a material
consideration in the planning process.
East Area Development Framework
1.44
The East Area Development Framework covers the areas of Burngreave, Darnall,
Fir Vale, Tinsley, and Attercliffe. Its strategy contains a vision “Building
successful neighbourhoods around a strong economy”. The strategy proposes a
range of initiatives aimed at creating sustainable communities where a stronger
and more varied housing market underpins a more buoyant economy, and an
improved quality of life. It describes a vision of strengthening existing
communities by providing high quality aspirational housing, close to local
amenities, in areas that are well connected to places of work and to leisure
facilities. It asserts that there is capacity within the East area to accommodate
new workers for the city’s economy.
Darnall, Attercliffe and Tinsley Neighbourhood Development Framework
1.45
The Darnall, Attercliffe and Tinsley Neighbourhood Development Framework
(DAT NDF) was approved by the City Council’s Cabinet in June 2007. The aim of
the document is to provide a local framework to deliver the wider strategic
ambitions of the East ADF.
1.46
The objectives of the masterplanning exercise are to create sustainable and
attractive neighbourhoods; improve the character and diversity of the area by
23
Cabinet resolution, 11th May 2005
-9-
undertaking physical renewal linked to social and economic initiatives in the area;
to help create a positive perception of the area and attract inward investment; to
offer a more attractive choice of housing in terms of tenure and type; and to
create a step change in design quality.
1.47
The residential policy area designations and site allocations for housing or
housing led development promote new housing in areas that are consistent with
these documents and will help to deliver their aims and objectives. The policy
areas include Housing Areas, where housing is explicitly preferred, and Flexible
Use Areas, where there is no preference but acceptable uses are all compatible
with housing. New housing is promoted within the valley in sustainable locations
close to good transport links, which will help connections with existing
communities, and have good accessibility to job opportunities in the wider valley.
1.48
The DAT NDF specifically promotes the area around the canal at Attercliffe for
new housing-led regeneration. This has been taken on board when determining
which land uses and site allocations would be most appropriate to deliver
regeneration of these former industrial sites.
Attercliffe Action Plan
1.49
An action plan for the Attercliffe Centre was commissioned by the City Council as
part of its Thriving District and Local Centres Initiative 24. The Action Plan was
approved by the Council’s Cabinet in March 2011 25. It seeks to guide public and
private investment and development decisions within the area, and promote the
economic regeneration of Attercliffe. The plan sets out a framework for a thriving
local centre. It contains a development strategy of priority and longer term
projects aimed at revitalising the high street and supporting existing businesses
by improving the quality of the centre and its surroundings, and identifying
opportunities for investment and improvement.
Sheffield City Region Enterprise Zone
1.50
The Tinsley Park area of the Lower Don Valley (around Europa Link and
Shepcote Lane) is included within the Sheffield City Region Enterprise Zone 26. It
is identified as a Modern Manufacturing and Technology Growth Area. To speed
up the delivery of development and attract new businesses, sites within the EZ
will benefit from simplified planning procedures and financial incentives
(enhanced capital allowances) between 2012 and 2015.
24
The corporate plan ‘Standing up for Sheffield’ approved by Cabinet in November 2011 includes a priority
‘A Great Place to Live’ which has thriving neighbourhoods as one of its main aims. See:
www.sheffield.gov.uk/Standing up for Sheffield/corporate-plan. A strategy aimed towards improving
centres is being developed as part of the Council’s ‘Better Neighbourhoods’ regeneration project. See:
www.sheffield.gov.uk/Thriving Centres
25
www.sheffield.gov.uk/attercliffe-action-plan
26
www.sheffieldenterprisezone.co.uk/sheffieldrotherham
- 10 -
Local Development Order, April 2012
1.51
To assist with delivery of the EZ the City Council has adopted a Local
Development Order (LDO) for a site known as Europa Link. The LDO covers part
of the Sheffield Business Park (the site of the former runway of Sheffield Airport)
and additional land occupied by the Tinsley Bridge Group27. Sites that meet the
requirements set out in the LDO documents can be developed without the need
for a planning application or a fee. The LDO will expire on 31st March 2015.
There are 2 site allocations that fall within this area 28.
Sheffield – Rotherham Don Valley Infrastructure Masterplan
1.52
This masterplan 29, commissioned in 2011, is a joint exercise between Sheffield
and Rotherham Councils. At present the Sheffield-Rotherham Don Valley suffers
from a number of physical barriers which may discourage investors from coming
to the area. These obstacles include:
•
•
•
•
transport infrastructure which is already at capacity;
environmental issues including a high risk of flooding in some areas, poor
air quality standards and landscaping aspirations;
a lack of incentives for new manufacturing development; and
a shortage of sites for housing in the immediate area.
1.53
The masterplan will mainly focus on infrastructure and delivery, and be a longterm tool to use to engage with partners in the area in order to gain benefit from
coordinating personnel, finance, and the delivery of infrastructure works. It will be
a framework for integrating the investment plans of public and private sector
stakeholders in the area. It will make links between projects which can be
delivered better by stakeholders working together in a coordinated way, and set
key priorities across the boundary of the two Local Authorities. It will help to
define and reinforce the Don Valley’s unique selling points, and be a tool to assist
delivery of site allocations within the valley.
1.54
A draft version of the Masterplan is due to be completed by the end of 2013 and
approved by Sheffield and Rotherham Cabinets as a material consideration in
early 2014.
Transport Strategies
The Third Local Transport Plan (LTP3)
1.55
The third LTP sets out a strategy for the development of transport (in South
Yorkshire) for the period from 2011 to 2026. It encompasses a number of
27
www.sheffield.gov.uk/local-development-order
P00191 Sheffield Business Park Phase 2 and P00472 Europa Link, see Chapter 3 for details.
29
www.sheffield.gov.uk/sheffield-rotherham-masterplan
28
- 11 -
documents including the Sheffield City Region Transport Strategy, the South
Yorkshire Implementation Plan, and it is accompanied by a Public Transport
Action Plan. LTP3 is produced by The South Yorkshire Local Transport
Partnership (SYLTP) which is made up of the four Local Authorities in South
Yorkshire (Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham and Sheffield) and the South
Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) 30.
1.56
The SCR Transport Strategy is the first part of the LTP3; it covers the Sheffield
City Region, which includes the four districts of South Yorkshire and five districts
in the East Midlands. The strategy specifies key priorities at a high level 31.
1.57
The second part of the LTP3 is an Implementation Plan; this describes the main
areas of transport investments from 2011 to 2015. It adds short-term delivery
considerations to the list of priorities defined in the transport strategy. In the plan
specific implementation actions for Sheffield are set out from paragraph 7.46 32.
1.58
Tables 4.1 to 4.4 in this document set out a list of actions and who the lead
partner will be. For LDV these specifically include, Sheffield-Rotherham tramtrain scheme, Supertram provision of additional vehicles, Bus Rapid Transit
(BRT) North, and Interg8 (or South Yorkshire Strategic Park and Ride Network).
1.59
It also includes more cross cutting projects such as work with operators and
developers to ensure appropriate provision of public transport to serve new
developments, and provide services that match patterns of working; and bespoke
solutions (e.g. Wheels to Work project, car sharing, car clubs, taxi initiatives)
where they show value for money. One of the key identified actions is to make
public transport a competitive travel option, through delivery of a Public Transport
Action Plan (see paragraph 1.67).
1.60
The third part is annual delivery programmes which set out in detail the agreed
prioritised delivery programme for the next financial year. Delivery is affected by
significant government spending cuts for transport, and reduced local Authority
and PTE resources, but the SYLTP want to deliver a successful plan, so projects
are set out in the implementation plan subject to successful funding from a
combination of LTP funding, and funding from other sources such as Local
Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF), Regional Growth Fund (RGF) and other
sources such as private sector and European Regional Development Funds
(ERDF).
1.61
There is also the potential of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), to help pay
for infrastructure required to serve new development.
30
www.syltp.org.uk/
www.syltp.org.uk/documents/SCRTransportStrategy.pdf
32
www.syltp.org.uk/implementation.aspx
31
- 12 -
1.62
There remains a significant risk that there will not be sufficient resources over the
plan period to support all of the strategy priorities. Some initiatives will be
rethought, re-phased, resized, or in some cases postponed until further resources
are available.
Local Sustainable Travel Fund (LSTF)
1.63
The LSTF is a new grant stream (capital and revenue) against which local
authorities are invited to bid to fund packages of interventions that address local
transport issues in sustainable ways. The government is making £560 million
available to the Fund over the period 2011-2015.
1.64
In June 2012 the South Yorkshire partners were successful in their bid to this
fund. The Lower Don Valley is one of the priority areas identified in the bid (as a
deprived urban area and presence of an Enterprise Zone) to address the
mismatch between the geography of the supply and demand of labour. This is
identified as an issue not only for those looking to start a job or training, but also
to employers. Evidence from community based employment agencies (provided
to support the bid) gave examples of people unable to start a job because public
transport timetables do not match the working hours, and some employers
preference for employees who drive to work since this make their start times
more reliable.
1.65
South Yorkshire was awarded £24.5m for sustainable transport schemes that
support people starting working or acquiring work skills, enable existing
commuters to travel more sustainably, improving business efficiency, and
promoting a low-carbon travel culture.
1.66
Section C in the bid document indicates the range of initiatives to be implemented
to encourage sustainable commuting and increase connectivity of people to job
locations (see page 9 33).
South Yorkshire Public Transport Action Plan 2011-12 to 2015/16
1.67
This document sets out the actions that Public Transport partners will deliver over
a three year period to support the achievement of key priorities set out in the
Sheffield City Region Transport Strategy. It is particularly focused on how public
transport can support South Yorkshire’s economic, environmental and social
aspirations.
1.68
Linking people to jobs is one of the key priorities in this document (see from
paragraph 4.3.1). It makes it clear that an understanding of where future jobs will
be is important for the action plan to be effective, and aims to do this by working
in partnership with operators to ensure that service provision satisfies demand for
33
www.syltp.org.uk/documents/LSTF%20large%20project%20initial%20proposal.pdf
- 13 -
services, and using “pump priming” or “kick-starting” services to new employment
sites, making use of developer funding as appropriate.
1.69
The Land Use and Transport Integration (LUTI) process is a proactive approach
to integrating the planning of land use and transport, and is supported by all
South Yorkshire Districts It is important that public transport access is adequately
reflected in site allocations. LUTI can be used to advise against development that
would not facilitate the introduction of commercially viable services or access by
other suitable modes (see also Chapter 3 paragraph 3.11).
Rotherham Borough Council Local Plan (formerly Local Development
Framework)
1.70
The eastern boundary of the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy Area is also the
boundary with Rotherham. Policy area designations and site allocations in
Tinsley and at Tinsley Park are most affected by proposed land uses in
Rotherham as they are the closest neighbours.
1.71
Rotherham Borough Council is at an earlier stage in the local plan process. A
Draft Core Strategy was published in June 2011, and it is preparing to submit its
Core Strategy to Government. A Sites and Policies Development Plan Document
is also being prepared.
1.72
The Rotherham/Sheffield corridor has been identified as a key spatial zone,
especially for employment and transport issues. For example, Rotherham has by
far the highest rate of commuting flows in South Yorkshire due to its central
location, proximity to Sheffield, and relatively low house prices. Sheffield is a
major source of employment opportunities for Rotherham’s workforce with 21.5%
commuting into Sheffield for work 34.
1.73
Account has been taken of early proposed land use allocations across the
boundary to check for land use conflicts.
South East Urban Area
1.74
34
35
In the South East Urban Area there are 3 main sub-areas: Arbourthorne Ward,
Manor Castle Ward, and the remaining area comprising the Richmond Ward
and part of the Handsworth Ward. Both Manor Castle and the Arbourthorne
Wards form part of the Housing Renewal Area as defined by Core Strategy CS24
‘Maximising the Use of Previously Developed land for New Housing’ and CS25
Priorities for Releasing Land for New Housing’ 35. These areas are predominately
housing areas that are suffering from housing market weakness and
regeneration/ renewal is the main objective.
Rotherham LDF Draft Core Strategy June 2011, paragraph 2.5
Core Strategy, pages 64 and 65
- 14 -
Planning Strategies and Policies
Housing Renewal Area
South Area Development Framework (ADF)
1.75
The majority of the South East Urban Area is within the former Housing Market
Renewal (HMR) Area. The overall strategy for housing renewal in this area is
detailed by the South Area Development Framework 36, which covers the Manor
Castle, and Arbourthorne Wards. Although the national Housing Market Renewal
Programme has ceased in March 2011, the South ADF remains relevant.
1.76
The South ADF identifies that the majority of housing stock in the area requires
renewal in order to meet changing demands and to meet demands for a greater
mix of tenures (especially as the area contains a very high percentage of socially
rented houses). Broadening its appeal to a wider range of residents who are able
to find decent quality, affordable and family housing within its neighbourhoods is
a key objective. The report also highlights a requirement for good quality design,
the development of cleared sites, and the provision of higher densities to allow for
the sustainable provision of local facilities, as factors to encourage greater
investment in the area.
1.77
The Framework also supports the provision of additional community facilities
within neighbourhoods in order to provide residents better access to facilities that
will counter social exclusion and encourage new residents to the area.
1.78
Under the former Transform South Yorkshire Pathfinder several Master Plans and
Neighbourhood Development Frameworks were produced, these developed
further the aims/objectives of the South ADF at a neighbourhood level. These
documents underwent several rounds of public consultation with residents,
businesses, landowners and other stakeholders. They have all been approved
by Planning Committee and Council Cabinet, between 2005 and 2007, as
material considerations in the planning process, and are still relevant documents
for the areas they cover. Details of these are provided below:
City Road Neighbourhood Development Framework (2007)
1.79
The City Road Area Development Framework 37 covers the areas of Manor Castle
Ward alongside City Road, from Park Hill towards Manor Top.
1.80
The overall strategy involves a vision to make the area more of a ‘destination’; a
place of purpose and a place to belong rather than a place to ‘pass through’. The
aim is to balance the role of the area as a movement corridor, with the need to
establish effective ‘hubs of activity’ that create a lively and place with character.
36
South Area Development Framework 2005, Transform South Yorkshire. A copy is available to view from
Forward and Area Planning Team.
37
City Road Neighbourhood Development Framework, EDAW, 2007. www.sheffield.gov.uk/city-road-ndf
- 15 -
This vision for the City Road corridor will help achieve social and economic
transformation of the South Sheffield neighbourhoods around it.
Manor Neighbourhood Development Framework (NDF) (2007)
1.81
The aim of this Framework 38 is to create a sustainable neighbourhood involving
establishment of a mixed income and integrated community and an improved
local public image for the area. The specific objectives are to:
• create sustainable and attractive neighbourhoods;
• undertake physical renewal linked to social and economic initiatives in the
area;
• help create a positive perception of the area and attract inward investment;
• offer a more attractive choice of housing in terms of tenure and type; and
• create a step change in design quality.
1.82
The Manor NDF specifically promotes the redevelopment of key housing sites for
new residential uses designed for the needs of key target groups – families and
older people. Targeted environmental improvements are also encouraged,
including the open space at Manor Fields.
Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne Master Plan (2005)
1.83
The proposals of this Masterplan 39 include a combination of remodeling existing
residential areas, supporting the delivery of decent homes, and replacing
obsolete properties with new quality buildings. Proposals are recommended for
12 key sites using existing and further clearance areas that should radically alter
the quality, range and type of housing available. The improvement of key streets
and major open spaces will help to improve the attractiveness of the areas. The
plan also seeks to improve the links between housing and transport infrastructure
and to complement other planned and existing regeneration work in the area.
1.84
This Masterplan identifies several strategic areas of change. The vision for
Wybourn and Manor Park has seven main strands in order to deliver the
transformational change required to make this a location of choice for both
existing and incoming residents. The vision encompasses general improvement
to the retained housing stock which will be achieved by:
•
•
•
proposals to transfer Council housing stock to other Registered Providers,
selective redevelopment which is proposed to provide higher quality
housing, including some aspirational housing,
improvement of services along the City Road corridor,
38
Manor Neighbourhood Development Framework, EDAW, 2007. www.sheffield.gov.uk/manor-ndf
Sheffield City Council - Wybourn Arbourthorne Manor Park Masterplan
39
- 16 -
•
•
•
•
the creation of a new Wybourn centre on Manor Oaks Road, focussing on
the cluster of community facilities that already exist there,
addressing environmental improvements throughout the estate, especially
in dealing with the problems of parked cars on the verges of roads, litter,
poor street lighting and poorly maintained spaces behind gardens
improvements to existing transport infrastructure such as extending the
bus link along Cricket Inn Road, and
investment in the major parks in the area, including Skye Edge, Manor
Oaks, and Corker Bottoms, partly funded by new development on the
fringes of the parks themselves.
The Sheffield Housing Company
1.85
As outlined above, these Master Plans and NDFs are still being used and many
of the principles and development areas have been embedded within the Local
Plan. In terms of new housing provision, there are several site allocations that
will be delivered by the Sheffield Housing Company 40. This is a partnership
between Sheffield City Council, Keepmoat Homes, and Great Places. It was set
up in 2011 to deliver new housing in the Housing Renewal Area, to continue the
neighbourhood regeneration efforts of the former Transform South Yorkshire
Pathfinder. The Sheffield Housing Company has a build programme covering 4
phases of development as follows:
Phase 1 – 2012 to 2015
Phase 2 – 2014 to 2020
Phase 3 – 2017 to 2026
Phase 4 – 2022 to 2031
1.86
A comprehensive Business Plan has been formulated for the phasing of sites and
specific details are provided in Chapter 5 South East Urban Area Site Allocations.
Norfolk Park Regeneration Plan (2000)
1.87
The physical regeneration aspects of this document were approved by the City
Council as supplementary planning guidance and a material consideration in
planning decisions 41. The overall objective of the document was to develop
effective, deliverable and fundable plans for the sustainable physical, social and
economic regeneration of the Norfolk Park Estate. Specific objectives are to:
•
•
•
40
41
develop a new positive and distinctive identity for the area;
develop a mix of good quality homes for rent and sale, the design of
which enhances a sense of place;
create an urban village atmosphere with a range of shops and services
and a high quality community and business facilities centre;
Sheffield City Council - Sheffield Housing Company
A copy is available to view from Forward and Area Planning Team.
- 17 -
•
•
improve open spaces and establish better links to the wider network to
make best use of natural spaces, topography and vistas;
identify and create sustainable employment opportunities to re-integrate
local residents back into the labour market.
1.87 The Norfolk Park Regeneration Plan promotes the redevelopment of 11 key
housing sites on a mixed tenure basis. It also promotes renewal of the local
shopping centre, along with various highway and landscape improvements.
Detailed feasibility studies were prepared for half of the development sites and
the remaining half were covered by design principles guidance. The document
aspires to a major improvement in design quality to enhance community safety of
housing layouts and open spaces.
- 18 -
PART 1
LOWER DON VALLEY CORE STRATEGY AREA
2
LOWER DON VALLEY POLICY AREAS
2.1
The policy areas cut across the defined subareas within the Lower Don Valley, so
the whole of the Valley is treated as single area for the purpose of presenting the
evidence for them.
Business Policy Area
2.2
Within a Business Area there are no preferred land uses. Land uses could
consist of a mixture of Offices (B1a) other B1 uses and/ or housing. This is
provided that:
•
•
Office development is provided in accordance with policy CS3 ‘Locations
for Office development’
Residential uses (including student accommodation and hostels) do not
cover more than 40% of the gross floorspace in the area 42.
2.3
This is a flexible approach which both supports Core Strategy policy CS7
‘Meadowhall’ for employment to be the predominant land use, and introduces
flexibility to create a new mixed use area in accordance with area
masterplanning, see paragraph 2.11.
2.4
There is one Business Area designation within Lower Don Valley Core Strategy
Area. This covers the land around Weedon Street/Carbrook Street and Vulcan
Road to the south and east of the Meadowhall Centre. The Business Area
designation is also carried into the fringes of the area at Meadowhall Road. This
will encourage land use links with the communities on the valley side at
Brightside/ Wincobank.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.5
42
43
The first objective in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is ‘Building
a strong competitive economy’. It states ‘Local Planning Authorities should plan
proactively to meet the development needs of businesses ….’ 43 This is
supported by designating employment-led policy areas across the Lower Don
Valley that can deliver this aim.
City Policies and Sites, Policy H1
NPPF paragraph 19. page 6
- 19 -
2.6
The masterplanning that has been carried out in the area, (in particular the
objectives of the Sheffield Rotherham Infrastructure Masterplan which are to
ensure that the area is fit to accommodate new investment and growth 44); the site
allocations described in part two of this document, which show locations where
growth can be accommodated; together with initiatives such as the Enterprise
Zone 45, all come together in the Lower Don Valley and are entirely in line and
support the policy requirements in the NPPF, paragraph 21, which states:
”Planning policies should recognise and seek to address potential barriers to
investment, including a poor environment or any lack of infrastructure, services or
housing.....”
and goes on to include references to a clear economic vision and strategy that
encourages economic growth, supporting existing business sectors, and planning
positively for knowledge driven, creative or high technology industries.
2.7
This Business Area specifically supports Core Planning Principle number 9 in its
promotion of a new employment-led community around Meadowhall. It states:
‘promote mixed use developments and encourage multiple benefits from the use
of land …’ 46
2.8
This Business Area will also help to deliver NPPF objective 6. ‘Delivering a wide
choice of high quality homes’ by including a significant amount of housing as part
of the mix of uses within the policy area.
Core Strategy
2.9
Core Strategy policy CS3 ’Locations for Office Development’ 47, promotes office
development in accessible locations to the edge of the City Centre and in District
Centres, and on high-frequency public transport routes. Meadowhall is
specifically mentioned in this policy as a suitable location for offices as an
alternative to the City Centre and a Business Area would allow this to happen.
2.10
Core Strategy policy CS7 ’Meadowhall’ 48 deals specifically with the area around
the Meadowhall Centre and brings together the main elements of spatial policy
for this subarea. CS7 refers specifically to employment uses including office
development and non-office business uses, and to the potential for housing,
provided environmental conditions can be made acceptable. The mix of
Business Areas is entirely consistent with this.
44
See paragraph 1.52
See paragraph 1.50
46
NPPF page 6
47
Core Strategy, page 35
48
Core Strategy, page 41
45
- 20 -
Other strategies or policies
2.11
The Lower Don Valley Vision and Masterplan proposes this area for a new mixed
use district that would provide regeneration of the Lower Don Valley. This would
be achieved by introducing a new range of land uses into the area and gradually
displacing the older traditional industries to other more suitable locations in the
valley 49.
2.12
The mix of uses in the area designated as Business Area will enable this to be
realised.
Justification
2.13
This Business Area is well located for employment uses. This is because it is
close to the Meadowhall Transport Interchange with bus, train, and tram
connections. It has good access directly to the M1 motorway at junction 34south.
Although the City Centre is the priority location for offices, it is recognised in the
Core Strategy that Meadowhall has a role in delivering the City’s overall office
requirements. It can provide for a ‘campus style’ environment that cannot be
accommodated in the City Centre and provide a location for those businesses
that do need direct access to the national road network.
Alternative Options
2.14
The alternative options for this policy area that were considered are:
(a) Housing Area
(b) Mixed use area (Flexible Use Policy Area or General Employment Area)
(c) Business and Industry Area
(d) District Centre
2.15
49
50
For a Housing Area, paragraph 2.24 below refers to the scale of housing that
would be needed here to be sustainable as a new neighbourhood. The area
could contribute to the provision of housing in the long term in the Lower Don
Valley, in keeping with Core Strategy policy CS23, and might help to increase the
overall capacity of deliverable sites in the city. However, designating it as a
Housing Area would detract from the emphasis on employment as the major land
use for this area set out in Core Strategy policy CS7. If major housing were
promoted as preferred use too soon it could divert interest and investment from
existing housing renewal areas that are trying to improve, for example where the
Sheffield Housing Company 50 is concentrating its efforts.
Lower Don Valley Vision and Masterplan, November 2004, Page 71
See paragraph 1.85
- 21 -
2.16
The mix of uses in a Flexible Use Area is intended to support housing-led
regeneration. This would support the mixed use ambitions for the area and
introduce flexibility for more housing. However, it would not sufficiently reflect the
employment emphasis of Core Strategy policy CS7.
2.17
Designation as a General Employment Area would support employment-led
mixed use ambitions, and introduce flexibility, but would preclude the potential for
any housing as set out in the masterplan, and could also introduce general
industrial uses that would not be appropriate so near to the shopping centre.
2.18
Business and Industry is the nearest intentionally employment based policy area
alternative, but this would prevent housing as a land use, and encourage more
general industrial type uses that would detract from the high quality environment
that the masterplan is promoting for the area.
2.19
Expansion of the Shopping Centre was rejected as a policy area designation as
this would be contrary to Core Strategy policies CS7 and CS14 ‘City- wide
Distribution of Shopping and leisure Development’. The planning application and
appeal for a retail outlet here has been noted 51.
Planning Justification for Choice of Policy Area
2.20
The vision in the Lower Don Valley Masterplan and Vision, supported by Core
Strategy policy CS7, is for a mixed business and housing community that has the
advantages of good accessibility (Meadowhall Transport Interchange and access
to the motorway), but can also promote the advantages of living close to work by
providing housing and employment opportunities close together.
2.21
A Business Area designation in this location allows for mix of land uses to be
provided in this area that would best contribute to a high quality regeneration of
this part of the valley, and taking advantage of its gateway location into the city
from the M1 motorway.
2.22
In May 2009 the City Council granted outline permission across this area for a
major mixed use development comprising offices and housing, and including
hotel, commercial offices, food and drink, community facilities, leisure uses, and
retail, all supported by car parking, open space and landscaping, and other
ancillary land uses.
2.23
The application contains an indicative masterplan, and series of parameters plans
which shows plot by plot how these uses can be accommodated on the site 52.
The approval is also in line with the ambitions of the masterplan, which has
informed the policy area designation, and establishes, in principle, the range of
51
52
12/01017/FUL
08/02594/OUT
- 22 -
land uses. A site allocation is proposed for this area to support delivery of
development across this area (see P00127 River Don District, paragraph 3.43).
2.24
A residential community of around 1,000 houses would be needed to provide a
sustainable community in this location, (and this would need to be delivered
across no more than 40% of the area to be in line with policy H1). The new
housing would need to be a mixture of different types of housing in line with Core
Strategy policy CS41 ‘Creating Mixed Communities’ 53 and phasing of housing
development will need to be in line with policy CS25’ Priorities for Releasing Land
for New Housing’ 54, which gives priority to the Housing Renewal Areas and the
City Centre. The Business Area designation allows for housing (up to 40%) to be
included as part of a mixed-use development on selected sites in line with Core
Strategy policy CS7. This policy area would allow creation of a housing market
where one does not currently exist.
2.25
If this new high quality environment is to be created, then housing would be a
better complementary land use for business uses than industry (B2) or storage/
distribution (B8) would be. The Business Area menu of uses is a better fit for the
masterplan objectives as it allows housing where the other two policy areas do
not. Also the range of land uses has effectively been established by the extant
planning consent referred to above.
Sustainability Issues
2.26
The sustainability appraisals of sites in this area have shown that transport
impacts from housing and business use would be considerable at Junction
34south without mitigation. Mitigation measures will be needed to reduce car use
in this area for both congestion and air quality reasons. The location of jobs and
homes in this area close to the Meadowhall Interchange should encourage wider
use of public transport, and there is opportunity to reduce the number of vehicles
trips within the area by locating homes and jobs together and by requiring
developers to produce a travel plan to meet the specific needs of the area.
Equality Issues
2.27
53
54
The equality appraisal for sites in this policy area has shown that this area is very
accessible by car, but within parts of the area public transport routes may be
more than 400m away, which could cause problems at night for residents/workers
that do not have access to a car. The area could provide employment
opportunities in an area of low income and high unemployment. Mitigation
measures to enable more employment opportunities could include improvements
to public transport to bring high frequency routes closer to the site, and affordable
transport initiatives offered by employers to bring employees to the site. This
could be delivered via a travel plan. Labour training and employment initiatives
Core Strategy, page 83
Core Strategy, page 63
- 23 -
such as those offered by ‘The Source’ 55 would benefit those on low incomes and
or currently unemployed.
Consultee Preferences
2.28
In their response to the Emerging Options consultation British Land 56 considered
that the Business and Industrial Area designation as shown on the UDP did not
promote the image for the area that the Masterplan seeks. Most importantly, in
their view, it did not allow for a mix of business and housing uses which they saw
as the key uses for regeneration. The Business Area designation supports their
aims for the area in the masterplan. At the Preferred Options consultation British
Land 57 supported this approach provided the four separate site allocations shown
at that time were merged to provide for a more flexible approach to delivery
across the area (see commentary for site P00127 River Don District) .
2.29
Also at this stage Transform South Yorkshire 58 expressed concern at a new
neighbourhood in this location, citing the potential for an isolated neighbourhood.
However, the requirement for a large enough number of houses to be located
here in order to comprise a sustainable community has been set out above and
could be delivered via the extant planning consent.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.30
Implementation of the policy area will be primarily through the Development
Management process. The Economy and City Region Background Report sets
out how applications for development in Business Areas will be assessed. The
exact mix and quantity and phasing of development within this proposed
Business Area is being largely addressed by the landowners (British Land). They
have an outline planning consent in this location to deliver a new mixed use
community within the majority of this proposed Business Area designation (see
comments above at paragraph 2.22 and site allocation P00127 River Don
District).
Flexibility and Risk
2.31
Some parts of the Business Area, particularly those close to the river Don on the
western edge of the area are located within a flood risk area 59. A large part of the
area around Weedon Street, Carbrook Street and Meadowhall Drive was affected
by the June 2007 floods, which was estimated to be a 1 in 200 year event
55
www.thesource.meadowhall.co.uk/
Emerging Options comment ID 305.06
57
Preferred Options comment ID’s 898-902
58
Preferred Options comment ID’s 1630-35
59
Sheffield Strategic Flood Risk Assessment July 2008, see: www.sheffield.gov.uk/strategic-flood-riskassessment
56
- 24 -
compounded by blockages at some bridges. Most of the area is shown on the
Strategic Flood Risk Assessment as within a Flood Zone 2, (defined as land lying
within an area of between 1 in 100 years and 1 in 1000 years flooding event).
Which for sensitive land uses acceptable in a Business Area (including housing
and offices) this means that they should also comply with the provisions of CS67
‘Flood Risk Management’ 60 . In this case, as part of the planning consent, a
condition is imposed that sets minimum floor levels, and agreement of a flood
alleviation scheme, which is required to be in place before development on the
areas at higher risk is commenced (planning consent condition 72).
2.32
The Tinsley Link is crucial to enable the full potential of the Business Area to be
realised. For example, the full extent of the River Don District development
referred to in paragraph 2.22 above can only proceed when the Tinsley Link is in
place (planning consent condition 14). The road scheme has planning consent
and is planned for delivery by 2014, see also paragraph 3.321 .
Monitoring
2.33
The mix of uses and dominance of uses within Business Areas will be
reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is
provided in the Economy and City Region Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Business Policy Area
2.34
The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.35
It is positively prepared:
•
2.36
60
It meets objectively assessed development requirements to deliver
regeneration objectives set out in the Lower Don Valley Masterplan for a
new employment led, mixed use neighbourhood, (paragraph 2.11).
It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy
specifically policies CS7 and CS3 (see paragraphs 2.9 and 2.10).
•
It is the most appropriate when considered against a variety of reasonable
alternatives as it provides flexibility for a mix of uses with an emphasis on
employment (paragraph 2.13).
•
The evidence is proportionate to the complex constraints of this area
(paragraphs 2.31 and 2.32) and its high profile location at the gateway to
the city from the M1 motorway.
Core Strategy, page 120
- 25 -
2.37
It is effective:
•
2.38
It is deliverable over the plan period as development consistent with the
Business Area designation, a large part already has outline planning
consent (paragraph 2.22).
It is consistent with national policy:
•
Business Areas provide a higher quality environment and are consistent
with, and needed to, deliver the first objective ‘Building a strong
competitive economy’, (NPPF paragraph 19).
•
The designation specifically supports Core Planning Principle number 9 in
its promotion of mixed use development that is the foundation of a new
employment-led community around Meadowhall (NPPF paragraph 17).
•
It is consistent with Core Planning Principle number 6. ‘Delivering a wide
choice of high quality homes’ by including housing as an acceptable use,
enabling a new community around Meadowhall through CS7 (paragraph
2.24).
Business and Industrial Policy Areas
2.39
Generally Business and Industrial Policy Areas follow the main roads through the
area on the edge of the wider industrial area. These are along Attercliffe Road
(A6178), acting as a buffer area between the industrial area at Newhall, the
Attercliffe Centre, and the proposed Flexible Use areas beside the canal. At
Tinsley Park Road acting as a buffer area between the industry around the canal
nearest Greenland Road and the housing areas of Darnall. There is also an area
at Carbrook along Attercliffe Road, acting as a buffer area between this same
industrial area at Newhall and the new proposed Business Area at Meadowhall.
There is also an area at Vantage Riverside alongside the canal at Sheffield
Road (A6178). A Business and Industry Area also forms the area of the
Sheffield Business Park, located south of the Europa link. A further large area
is located around Kettlebridge Road and along the Parkway (A630) which is
south of the railway line at the southern end of the Lower Don Valley Core
Strategy area. Further east along this railway line there is a small area at east
side of Prince of Wales Road in Darnall, between the road and the railway line.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.40
See paragraphs 2.5 and 2.6 which apply to all of the employment-led policy areas
in the Lower Don Valley.
- 26 -
2.41
The Business and Industrial Areas and Industrial Areas also specifically support
the fifth NPPF Core Principle which states that planning should ‘take account of
the different roles and character of different areas’ 61. Paragraph 2.45 describes
the reasons for the specific locations of business and industry and industrial land
uses in terms of potential for nuisance and the impact this may have on sensitive
uses such as residential. They are also characterised by large functional
buildings of a different scale and appearance to domestic scale buildings.
Core Strategy
2.42
The Core Strategy Spatial Strategy sets out guiding principles for locating
manufacturing and distribution/ warehousing land uses. Policy CS5 ’Locations for
Manufacturing, Distribution/Warehousing and other Non-office Businesses’ 62
states that there are four types of location that meet Core Strategy objectives and
the principles of the spatial strategy. The first on the list is the Lower Don Valley.
It follows then that as a strategic employment area a significant proportion of land
for these uses should be located here. Indeed the Lower Don Valley provides for
nearly half of Sheffield’s land for potential B2 / B8 space 63.
2.43
Business and Industrial Area and Industrial Area designations provide specifically
for the traditional industrial areas of the Lower Don Valley, as provided for in the
Core Strategy, where, historically, the metal industries and related manufacturing
uses have occupied the largest areas. Business and Industrial Areas together
with Industrial Areas (see paragraph 2.76) form the largest areas of policy
designation within the Lower Don Valley.
2.44
The areas covered by policy CS8 ‘Tinsley Park’ and CS9 ‘Attercliffe/Newhall and
Parkway/Kettlebridge’ 64 gave rise to the locations of both Business and Industrial
Areas and Industrial Areas within the Lower Don Valley. These policies identify
where employment areas that meet the location principles set out in CS5 above
are situated.
2.45
Business and Industrial Areas generally perform a more mixed business and
industry role. They are different from Industrial Areas in that they can be
promoted as having a higher quality environment that makes them generally
suitable for uses in the B1 use class, and can be located close to more sensitive
land uses such as housing. In some parts of the Lower Don Valley, such as
around Tinsley Park Road, and in parts of Attercliffe they can provide a buffer
between Housing Areas or other areas being promoted for new housing and
areas that are more industrial in character.
61
NPPF, page 5
Core Strategy, page 39
63
See Core Strategy Business and Industry Background Paper, Appendix 1 page 138
64
Core Strategy, pages 42 and 43
62
- 27 -
2.46
Offices (B1a) are acceptable in this policy area provided they meet strict location
criteria set out in policy CS3’Locations for Office Development’ 65. This policy sets
out strategic locations for office development, and supports the principle of some
class B1a offices within areas identified as Business and Industrial Areas in the
Lower Don Valley, provided they are on high-frequency public transport routes
(subparagraph c), or at Tinsley Park (subparagraph f). This supports the
designation of Business and Industry policy areas along the Attercliffe Road and
tram corridor, at Carbrook close to the Carbrook tram stop, and supports the
designation of an area at Tinsley Park at Sheffield Business Park.
Justification
2.47
Business and Industrial Areas in the Lower Don Valley are generally close and
complementary to the Industrial Areas and share many characteristics. The main
difference is that Business and Industry Areas are more flexible as business uses
(B1b and c) are included as preferred uses alongside Industry (B2), and
Warehouses and Distribution (B8).
Alternative Options
2.48
Although the boundaries to these areas reflect long established employment
areas they are not designated as Industrial Areas. As for Industrial Areas, they
generally have potential to provide well-located employment in terms of both
access for employees, and for transport of goods and raw materials; but added
flexibility is needed to accommodate demand for higher quality employment
locations, and to provide some areas close to the larger industrial sites that can
support the types of business and lighter industrial uses that benefit from colocation with the large scale industrial uses, such as those which support the
advanced manufacturing process.
2.49
Most of the areas were previously Fringe Industry and Business Areas in the
Unitary Development Plan, which allowed housing as an acceptable use in
principle. A policy area with a similar menu of land uses could have been written
as an alternative option to allow for maximum flexibility, especially at their edges
where they meet with residential areas in places. However, the Business and
Industry Area designation allows the character, function and appearance of the
areas to be focussed directly on business and industry, in accordance with the
emphasis in the Core Strategy on employment locations where we wouldn’t want
to inhibit economic development. It also supports the NPPF sixth Core Principle
which states
‘always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all
existing and future occupants of land and buildings’ 66.
65
66
Core Strategy, page 35
NPPF, page 5
- 28 -
It reduces the risk that sensitive uses such as housing would constrain
employment uses.
Planning Justification for Choice between Policy Areas
2.50
Whilst Industrial Areas comprise locations for primarily industrial land uses, some
locations on their edge, for example at Kettlebridge, at Carbrook, and at Tinsley
Park (south of Europa Link) have developed a different character. These are
related to areas where a number of planning consents have been granted and
implemented that signal a move away from traditional industrial and storage uses
towards business and lighter industrial uses, and rather than be supported as
areas for industry and storage only, other uses with higher environmental
standards are also preferred uses. Business and Industrial Area designation
better reflects the employment character of these areas and requires a slightly
different menu of uses to maintain their character and attract similar land uses.
2.51
The most significant of these areas is the Sheffield Business Park, originally
developed to support the Sheffield Airport by providing high quality surroundings
and good transport links to the national road network. Since the closure of the
airport in April 2008, the area has continued to be promoted as a mixed industry
and business location, and this is also supported by site allocation P00191
Sheffield Business Park Phase 2, (see from paragraph 3.87).
2.52
An area at Prince of Wales Road is shown as Business and Industry Area
because it is surrounded by existing housing area at Darnall, and is located away
from the main areas of industry in the Lower Don Valley. Land uses here need to
reflect the existing employment use of the site which is expected to continue,
whilst recognising the location of sensitive uses very close by. It reduces the risk
that heavier uses that would be constrained by or impact on housing nearby will
be located here.
2.53
An area at Sheffield Road (formerly the site of Betafence) had been shown as a
Business Area at the Preferred Option stage, which at that time included B1 (a)
offices as a preferred use. It was shown this way as a continuation of the
approach being developed for the land to the south of the Meadowhall Centre at
Weedon Street, known as River Don District, see paragraph 2.13.
2.54
However, the evidence points to the site as now not sufficiently fulfilling the
characteristics for Business Areas set out in policy H1, see also paragraph 2.2.
Policy H1 says that Business areas are suitable for “employment uses
appropriate to central and edge of centre locations”. This normally means the
City Centre and District Centres, which is not relevant for this area. The Business
Area at Meadowhall is close to the Meadowhall Interchange and is specifically
mentioned in Policy CS3. This area at Sheffield Road does not meet the criteria
for office location set out in policy CS3. In any case the spatial strategy of the
Core Strategy indicates a strong emphasis to the City Centre for office
- 29 -
development, so an over-extended cluster of office locations in the Lower Don
Valley would not deliver this.
2.55
Business areas also include housing as an acceptable use. Housing would not be
appropriate or sustainable in this location. The area is very isolated and
disconnected from existing housing areas and the facilities that residents would
need, such as schools and health facilities. Since, according to policy H1,
housing could only occupy less than 40% of the area it is unlikely that housing
could be provided in sufficient quantity to be self sustaining. Also the
environmental quality of this area, close to the motorway and hemmed in by
Sheffield Road and the tramline would be difficult to improve to accommodate a
sensitive residential use.
2.56
However, the area does accord well with CS5, which sets out locations for
manufacturing, distribution/warehousing and other non-office businesses. The
Lower Don Valley is one of the four strategic locations identified for these
purposes. The area is particularly suitable because it is located away from
existing housing, so it could, for example, accommodate manufacturing, or
distribution and warehousing type uses, but is equally suitable for non office
businesses (research and development and light industry), and it is also relatively
accessible by public transport (in this case the tram) for potential employees and
visitors.
2.57
The policy area designation was changed at the Draft stage from Business Area
to Business and Industry area, as this removes the emphasis on a location for
major offices, whilst providing flexibility for a range of other uses including the
non-office business uses that would comply with Core Strategy policy CS7.
2.58
An area at Tinsley Park Road had previously been included within a Flexible Use
area on the Draft Proposal Map (June 2010). Paragraph 2.236 describes the
reasons for the Flexible Use Areas in the Lower Don Valley. However, following
consultation with landowners, as part of the Sheffield-Rotherham Lower Don
Valley Masterplan work, several industrial land users within this area expressed
concern about this designation and the potential impact on the future of their
businesses, and in some cases their expansion plans. The menu of these areas
is intended to prepare the way for housing becoming a characteristic use, and so
the menu of land uses in Flexible Use Areas would have been a severe constraint
on their operation. In turn, some of these businesses would be a hindrance for
bringing new land uses into this area, as they would not be good neighbours for
more sensitive uses. Given that there were no other representations made about
this policy area, and the fact that the businesses concerned intend to remain in
the area, it was decided that this area should be shown as a Business and
Industry Area.
- 30 -
Sustainability Issues
2.59
The Sustainability Appraisals for sites in this policy area generally recognise the
potential of sites to provide significant employment opportunities. Most of the
areas are located close to the motorway or to main roads through the area, which
will provide for businesses requiring access to the national road network, but
some parts of the Business and Industrial Areas such as Sheffield Business Park
at Europa Link, and the central part of the Parkway area are not very well located
for public transport access. Therefore, development of these areas for
employment uses with large numbers of employees could require mitigation
measures, such as a requirement for travel plans that meet the needs of the area
that can include measures to improve public transport access. This is specifically
referred to in the related Core Strategy policies (CS8 and CS9).
Equality Issues
2.60 The equality appraisal for sites in these policy areas has shown that generally the
Business and Industrial Areas are accessible by car, but some parts of the policy
areas, such as around Europa Link are more than 400m away from high
frequency public transport routes, which could cause problems for workers that
do not have access to a car. The policy areas could, however, provide
employment opportunities close to residential areas on the valley sides with low
income and high unemployment. Mitigation measures could include
improvements to public transport to bring an adequate level of service closer to
the areas, and affordable transport initiatives to bring employees to the site. The
options for achieving this could be captured within a travel plan by employers.
Labour training and employment initiatives would benefit those on low incomes
and or currently unemployed.
Consultee Preferences
Sheffield Road (former Betafence site)
2.61
At the Preferred Option stage comments were made about the proposed
Business Area at Sheffield Road (later amended to Business and Industry area).
British Land objected to the extension of the Business Area, in their view the area
is outside of the Lover Don Valley Masterplan area, and development here for
uses similar to River Don District could inhibit its implementation. Transform
South Yorkshire objected to the promotion of this area for housing (which would
have been possible under the previous Business Area designation) as the site is
isolated from existing housing areas. Indigo Planning considered that because of
the prominent location of this site, it should be allocated for Headquarter office
development 67 . These were all considered as part of the revision referred to at
paragraph 2.53.
67
British Land: Preferred Options Comment ID 919; Transform South Yorkshire: Preferred Options
Comment ID 1635; Indigo Planning: Draft Comment ID 837
- 31 -
Tinsley Park Road
2.62
There were objections by landowners at Tinsley Park Road, to a proposed
change of policy designation from the UDP; this is dealt with in paragraph 2.58
above.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.63
Implementation of the preferred and acceptable uses in this policy area will be
primarily through the Development Management process. The Economy and
City Region Background Report sets out how applications for development in
Business and Industrial Policy Areas will be assessed. These areas have all
been examined for deliverability of preferred uses, and the Economy and City
Region Background Report discusses this in more detail. Most of the areas are
already stable employment locations for mixed business and industry, and there
are no irresolvable issues that would prevent change in these areas during the
plan period.
2.64
Some key sites have been allocated to deliver new industrial and business uses
in these areas (see site allocations P00136, P00143, P00472, P00138, P00164,
P00191, P00471, and P00219 from paragraph 3.19 – 3.126).
2.65
However, given the prominent location of P00138 next to the Meadowhall Retail
Park and close to J34south, there is evidence that the landowners are keen to
promote the site for retail uses which could affect the delivery of this site for
preferred uses (see risk below).
2.66
At Europa Link a large part of the Business and Industry area is taken up by
Phase 2 of the Sheffield Business Park, this area (site allocation P00191) has
an existing planning consent which provides the framework for delivery of this
site and therefore a large part of this policy area. This Business and Industry
Area is also within the Sheffield City Region Enterprise Zone (EZ) and part of it
is covered by a Local Development Order. Development that meets the
requirements of the LDO could be developed without the need for a planning
application, this is intended to promote speedier delivery of development, see
paragraph 1.51.
Flexibility and Risk
2.67
Some parts of the proposed Business and Industrial Areas, particularly the one
close to the canal at Sheffield Road, are located within a medium flood risk area,
and delivery of preferred uses will have to comply with policy CS67 ‘Flood Risk
Management’. National policy requires that sites with a lower probability of
flooding are preferred to those with a higher risk. There is a risk that delivery of
- 32 -
these parts of the Business and Industry Area may be delayed if other sites at a
lower risk are suitable and available for development first. In any case any
development proposals within this area will be required to show mitigation of flood
risk, and indicate flood protection measures as part of a planning application, and
any schemes should be designed for resilience to flooding.
2.68
There is a risk that at Sheffield Road (the former Betafence site) this part of the
Business and Industry Area will not be delivered for Business or Industry uses in
line with policy H1 at all. It is noted that the landowners have indicated their
intention to promote the site for retail use 68.
2.69
There is a risk that landowners may delay development on their land because of
the current poor economic climate, which is resulting in reduced investment in
new development, and this will be a factor right across all the employment policy
areas. In that case a framework for land uses is provided for when proposals do
come forward.
Monitoring
2.70
The mix of uses and dominance of uses within Business and Industrial Policy
Areas will be reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further
information is provided in the Economy and City Region Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Business and Industrial Policy Area
2.71
The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons:
2.72
It is positively prepared:
•
2.73
Concentrating Business and Industrial Areas in better industrial locations
where non-office business, industry and warehouses/storage (but not open
storage) uses are preferred should create certainty that will help to deliver
business and industrial development.
It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives for employment areas already
in the Core Strategy, specifically policies CS8 ‘Tinsley Park’ and CS9
‘Attercliffe/Newhall and Parkway/Kettlebridge’.
•
Land is needed in a range of employment areas that can deliver a higher
environmental standard than Industrial Areas, and can provide a buffer
employment area between dirtier and noisier industrial areas and more
sensitive land uses (paragraph 2.47).
68
Planning application reference 13/01632/FUL Erection of a non-food retail unit (Class A1) - pending
consideration.
- 33 -
•
2.74
It is effective:
•
2.75
The exclusion of housing as an acceptable use removes a potential
constraint on economic development (paragraphs 2.49).
These areas are already well established as sustainable and accessible
locations for employees and transport of goods and raw materials. It
accommodates those businesses that require a higher quality location, and
benefit from or need location close to, similar businesses, or support larger
scale industrial uses, (paragraph 2.48).
It is consistent with national policy:
•
These areas provide a flexible environment that can meet the needs of a
wide range of employment sectors that often locate together to benefit
from/or service each other, (NPPF paragraph 19 ‘Building a strong and
competitive economy’).
•
Sets out a specific role and character for these areas to meet the needs of
businesses (NPPF paragraph 17).
Industrial Policy Areas
2.76
The Industrial Areas are largely unchanged from the UDP, covering the western
side of the valley at Attercliffe and Newhall, alongside the River Don on both
banks. There is an industrial area on the east side of Greenland Road (A6102) at
Catley Road. A further large Industrial Area is proposed at Tinsley Park
between the north side of the Europa Link and the motorway. Industrial Areas
are also designated on the north east side of the Tinsley viaduct at Alsing Road
(former site of the Tinsley cooling towers).
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.77
Comments made at paragraph 2.5 which apply to Business and Industrial Areas
also apply to Industrial Areas.
Core Strategy
2.78
In terms of impact on the environment, the location of industrial uses is
sometimes more important than for any other employment use, as they can
cause nuisance to near neighbours. There is a need for locations where heavy
industrial processes, and uses such as waste transfer stations, can operate
- 34 -
without restrictions and away from sensitive uses. Industrial Areas are needed to
ensure that locations set out in the Core Strategy will be developed for these
particular land uses and they are different from Business and Industrial Areas in
that they provide an environment more suitable for heavier and noisier
operations.
2.79
Areas covered by Core Strategy policies CS8 ‘Tinsley Park’ and CS9
‘Attercliffe/Newhall and Parkway/Kettlebridge’ 69 are long-standing employment
areas containing areas of well established industrial uses on large flat sites,
contained generally by the main roads or railways lines through the area. Areas
identified for mainly industrial uses are located away from residential areas and
are accessible to the national road network, for transporting bulky goods and raw
material. For example, they include sites such as those occupied by Outokumpu
at Tinsley Park, and Forgemasters at Brightside Lane.
2.80
Within these areas, sites are also identified to meet future industrial needs, see
for example sites allocated for industrial uses P00182 Outokumpu within the
Tinsley Park area, and sites P00153 Faraday Road and P00174 Lumley Street in
the Attercliffe/Newhall area (see from paragraph 3.128 for details).
Justification
2.81 Given that industrial areas in the Lower Don Valley are generally already wellestablished, are capable of accommodating new and relocated development, and
give occupiers the certainty they can operate without impact on any nearby
sensitive uses, the existing ‘traditional’ locations are considered to be the best
focus for these uses, supported by policies CS8 and CS9 on locations for these
land uses.
Alternative Options
2.82 The areas designated Industrial Areas are responding to existing character, and
long established industrial use of areas, and the areas are largely unchanged
from the UDP. Industrial areas are designated where the separation of industry
from housing is of benefit to both uses. A residential environment needs to be
relatively free from nuisance such as noise, dirt; heavy traffic, pollution and
odours, but many industrial processes create these kinds of conditions. This
creates a poor living environment, which can lead to complaints against the
operations of manufacturing and distribution / warehousing, and hence
restrictions on their operations. Many manufacturing and distribution /
warehousing operations also rely on access to the strategic transport network to
allow the easy movement of raw materials and products.
2.83 As this is a strategic employment area the only reasonable alternative options
occur between the boundaries of the different employment policy areas, and
69
Core Strategy pages 42 and 43
- 35 -
boundary choices were considered in the context of the Business and Industrial
Areas that border many of the Industrial Areas.
2.84 Only one real alternative was considered. At Tinsley Park one option was to
have a single policy area for the whole area instead of Industrial Area to the north
of Europa Link and Business and Industrial Area to the south, in this case the
policy areas chosen reflect their different character, see paragraph 2.86 below.
2.85 At Lumley Street and Bernard Road a former industrial areas is now designated
for waste management uses, see paragraph 2.262.
Planning Justification for Choice between Policy Areas
2.86 At Tinsley Park the Sheffield Business Park has identified itself as an alternative
location for office development to the City Centre, and it is contained within sites
south of Europa Link, and the areas north of Europa Link have the character of
an industrial location occupied by long established uses such as the Outokumpu
SMAC site, and the large new sheds at the former Tinsley Marshalling Yards.
Europa Link is the boundary that identifies the separate character areas.
Sustainability Issues
2.87 The Sustainability Appraisals carried out for sites in Industrial Areas generally
recognise the Areas’ potential to provide employment opportunities.
Redevelopment of these sites would be beneficial in terms of making efficient use
of previously developed land in an existing employment area. The sites are
suitable for industrial uses because they are surrounded by other industrial uses
and away from residential areas, and attractive for warehousing, which depends
on good access to the road and motorway network.
Equality Issues
2.88
Generally these areas are very accessible by car, but within parts of the area
public transport routes may be more than 400m away, which could cause
problems at times for workers that do not have access to a car. Mitigation
measures to enable more employment opportunities could include improvements
to public transport to bring high frequency routes closer to the site, and affordable
transport initiatives offered by employers to bring employees to the site. This
could be delivered via a travel plan.
Consultee Preferences
2.89
There are no consultee comments specifically related to Industrial Policy Areas.
- 36 -
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.90 Most of the areas identified for industrial use have been operational for many
years and continued implementation of the policy area will be primarily through
the Development Management process. The Economy and City Region
Background Report sets out how applications for development in Industrial Policy
Areas will be assessed. These areas have all been examined for deliverability of
preferred uses and the Economy and City Region Background Report discusses
this in more detail. Uses that would not be acceptable in an industrial area would
generally prefer a higher quality environment, so it is not anticipated that there
would be significant pressure for unacceptable uses to come forward in these
areas.
2.91 Several sites have been allocated to deliver new industrial uses in these areas
(see sites P00137, P00140, P00145, P00153, P00160, P00174, P00178,
P00182, P00187, P00473, P00474, P00501 at paragraphs 3.127- 3.170).
Flexibility and Risk
2.92
Some parts of the Industrial Areas, particularly those close to the River Don in the
Attercliffe and Newhall Road area are located within a Medium Flood Risk area,
and delivery of preferred uses will have to comply with policy CS67 ‘Flood Risk
Management’. National policy requires that sites with a lower probability of
flooding are preferred to those with a higher risk. There is a risk that delivery of
these parts of the Industrial Area may be delayed if other sites at a lower risk are
suitable and available for development first. In any case any development
proposals within this area will be required to show mitigation of flood risk, and any
flood protection measures as part of a planning application, and any schemes
should be designed for resilience to flooding.
2.93
See also paragraph 2.69.
Monitoring
2.94
The mix and dominance of uses within Industrial Policy Areas will be reassessed
as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is provided in
the Economy and City Region Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Industrial Policy Area
2.95
The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
- 37 -
2.96
It is positively prepared:
•
2.97
2.98
It is justified:
•
The preferred industrial and storage uses, unimpeded by more sensitive
uses, are needed to deliver Core Strategy policies CS8 ‘Tinsley Park’ and
CS9 ‘Attercliffe/Newhall and Parkway/Kettlebridge’ (paragraph 2.79).
•
The character of some of the Tinsley Park area is more suited to a wider
range of uses including non-office uses, (paragraph 2.86).
It is effective:
•
2.99
The Industrial Areas meet the need within the city to accommodate
predominantly those heavier and noisier employment uses that do not
make good neighbours for more sensitive uses.
The industrial areas are already well established, and in accessible
locations where they can operate without restrictions, and away from
sensitive uses, and this is expected to continue. Other employment uses
are unlikely to be attracted to the lower quality environment of these areas,
(paragraph 2.82).
It is consistent with national policy:
•
Industrial Areas provide an environment that can deliver sustainable
economic development and cater for the needs of heavier employment
uses. This contributes to key NPPF objective ‘Building a strong competitive
economy’, (NPPF paragraph 19).
•
Sets out a specific role and character for industrial areas, for example,
need for flat sites, large sheds, or location away from sensitive uses,
(NPPF paragraph 17).
General Employment Policy Area
2.100 Three General Employment Areas are designated in the Lower Don Valley Core
Strategy area. They are at Alsing Road north of the Meadowhall Centre, and the
areas at Attercliffe Road and Attercliffe Common between the road and the
canal, stretching from the Don Valley Stadium, north eastwards to the
Meadowhall Retail Park, and including a smaller area at the Woodbourn
Stadium. These are areas with no preferred uses but acceptable uses tend to
support an emphasis on employment and exclude sensitive uses, such as
housing, that could impede development of employment uses. The flexibility
- 38 -
allows uses to come forward that would best serve the regeneration needs of the
area, see references to Core Strategy paragraph 2.104 below.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.101 See paragraph 2.5 which applies to all of the employment-led policy areas in the
Lower Don Valley.
2.102 This type of mixed use area supports Core Planning Principle number 9 which
states: ‘promote mixed use developments and encourage multiple benefits from
the use of land’ 70).
2.103 These policy areas also support the policy set out in objective 2 ‘Ensuring the
vitality of Town Centres’ 71, which refers to providing for situations where
proposals for main town centre uses, in this case large scale leisure, cannot be
accommodated in or adjacent to the City Centre.
Core Strategy
2.104 The spatial strategy sets out that the Lower Don Valley will be primarily an
employment location and can accommodate town-centre uses that cannot be
located in the City Centre. In addition policy CS15 ‘Locations for Large Leisure
and Cultural Development’ 72 specifically indicates that major leisure will be
located in the Lower Don Valley if there are no suitable sites are available in the
City Centre. General Employment Areas are employment areas that have the
widest flexibility in terms of the range of uses that could be accommodated. The
three General Employment Areas, set out above, support the spatial vision by
providing greater flexibility to bring forward both employment uses and
appropriate leisure uses. Although leisure developments are not specified as
acceptable uses in principle in General Employment Areas (as they are still
subject to the sequential approach) they would be considered on their merits.
Large-scale schemes requiring out-of-centre locations would be supported here
under Core Strategy policies which include policies CS7 ‘Meadowhall’ 73 and
CS21 ‘Boulevard of Sport’ 74.
2.105 CS7 sets out that the main spatial elements around Meadowhall should be
employment but that the area close to the transport interchange could
accommodate large-scale leisure uses that cannot be located in the City Centre.
70
NPPF paragraph 17
NPPF paragraph 23, point 8
72
Core Strategy, page 50
73
Core Strategy, page 41
74
Core Strategy, page 56
71
- 39 -
The Alsing Road General Employment Area fits with this criterion, as it is located
very close to the Interchange.
2.106 CS21 sets out that in the central part of the valley around the Don Valley
Stadium, sports related leisure will continue to be the principal land use, and this
is consistent with the areas identified for General Employment area where
employment and sports-related uses are able to locate together.
Other strategies or policies
2.107 The policy area designations reflect the ambitions for this area as set out in the
Lower Don Valley Vision and Masterplan 75. The masterplan supports its role as
both a leisure destination and major employment area, and offers flexibility in
terms of its employment role, and its role in regeneration of areas formerly
dominated by industry. No one use is preferred, but the existing cluster of sport
and leisure uses may attract other similar uses to this area.
Justification
Alternative Options
At Alsing Road
2.108 At Alsing Road, the area could have been shown as a Business Area to
correspond with the other sites around Meadowhall. The location, next to the
Tinsley Viaduct, close to Junction 34south, close to the Meadowhall Transport
Interchange, makes it very accessible, but the environment (in terms of air quality
and noise) makes it unsuitable for sensitive uses that could include residential.
2.109 General Employment Area designation maintains flexibility for a variety of
employment uses to come forward that would complement the Meadowhall
Centre, and the mix of uses that could come forward south of the Meadowhall
Centre at River Don District.
Around Woodbourn Stadium
2.110 The General Employment Area around the Woodbourn Stadium could have
continued to be shown as Industrial Area as it was on the UDP, or could be
shown as an Open Space Area to reflect its recreational importance, but neither
of these options would fully support the flexibility to provide for built sport and
leisure venues in the valley, and support the opportunity for related employment.
75
Lower Don Valley Vision and Masterplan, paragraph 6.2, page 68
- 40 -
Around the Don Valley Stadium
2.111 Since the UDP was adopted, leisure and retail developments have been
developed in this area that would support a change to the policy area
designations in the central part of the valley. The English Institute of Sport and
Ice Sheffield have been developed within the UDP Open Space Area by the Don
Valley Stadium; and Centertainment (a major leisure and restaurant
development) was developed within the former Fringe Industry and Business
Area at Broughton Lane.
2.112 This is a large policy area in a prominent and strategic position to support the
economic development of the City and parts of it could still be designated
differently. So, before confirming the General Employment Area as the most
suitable to deliver the range of land uses needed here, the strengths and
weaknesses of a wider range of alternative land use options were considered,
which included:
•
•
•
•
•
Open Space
Other Employment Areas
Housing Area
Flexible Use Area
General Employment Area
Open Space
2.113 In the central part of the valley, where existing sports and leisure facilities exist,
this could have been shown as an Open Space Area to support their recreation
function and the amount of associated open land. However, these are leisure
uses that, although open to the public for recreation, do not serve an open space
function in the same way that a sports field, park, or wildlife area would for
recreation. Some are built indoor facilities (English Institute of Sport/Ice
Sheffield), and they are more appropriately designated to reflect their importance
as developed leisure employment use. However, this option was selected for
some areas such as the Don Valley Bowl and the East End Park, because they
are obviously greenspace.
Other employment policy areas (Business Area, Industry Area, or Business and
Industry Area)
2.114 A greater emphasis could have been given to the range of policy areas as set out
below, promoting employment uses to meet the requirements of Core Strategy
policy CS1 ’Land for Employment and Economic Development’ (class B1(b) and
B1(c), B2, and B8 uses), but these were discounted.
2.115 Business Areas do not have preferred uses, which would allow flexibility here but
these are intended for those areas where large scale office uses would be
- 41 -
appropriate, and these are set out in Core Strategy policy CS3 ‘Locations for
Office Development’.
2.116 Industrial Areas, with their emphasis on the dirtier and noisier employment uses
as preferred uses, would be incompatible and poor neighbours for the
neighbouring Flexible Use Area with its emphasis on housing-led regeneration. It
would also be incompatible with the quality of environment that would be
expected next to areas that attract significant numbers of leisure visitors. In this
case Attercliffe Common performs a suitable barrier function between this area
and the Industrial Area to the west.
2.117 Business and Industry Areas would be the closest specifically employment based
policy area alternative to General Employment Area. It allows for a range of
business and industry uses, but with a mix that promotes a better environmental
standard than Industrial Areas. However, these would be preferred uses, and the
policy area is not as flexible as General Employment Area. In order to be
consistent with policy H1 they would need to cover 70% of the area, which would
impact on its sport/leisure character.
Housing Area
2.118 Core Strategy policy CS23 ‘Locations for New Housing’ identifies the Lower Don
Valley as a longer-term housing location and this would follow from successful
implementation of policy CS28 ‘Housing in Attercliffe and Darnall’. Part of the
area, immediately around the Don Valley Stadium lies next to the area
designated to support housing-led regeneration. However, policy CS21
’Boulevard of Sport’ specifically refers to sports related leisure as the principal
land use around the Don Valley Stadium. According to the menu of uses for a
Housing Area, set out in H1, Housing would be the preferred use and would have
to cover 70% of the area. This would be too sudden a change even if a housingled strategy were envisaged in the event of future area changes. In other
equivalent areas, as in the Attercliffe/Darnall area, a Flexible Use Area
designation has been used.
Flexible Use Area
2.119 As Flexible Use Areas are designated to enable transition to a housing or
housing-friendly area, the case for this policy area is similar to that for a Housing
area but without some of its weaknesses. The whole central area of the Lower
Don Valley, either side of the canal between Bacon Lane/Stadium Way in the
south, to the Meadowhall Retail Park in the north, is identified as an area of
transition between the old traditional industrial uses (some of which remains, but
much of which had disappeared or moved on), toward a new mixed community of
employment and housing uses.
2.120 Although the whole area is consistent with national policy promoting mixed use
development, (see paragraph 2.102), one single mixed use policy covering the
- 42 -
whole area would not be appropriate. A choice has to be made whether the
direction of travel is housing (as in Core Strategy policy CS28) or employment
oriented (in keeping with CS21 and previous masterplanning).
2.121 It is concluded that a Flexible Use Area designation would not be the most
appropriate for the area around the Stadium. Housing led regeneration would
more appropriately begin with the Flexible Use Area currently proposed around
the canal at Attercliffe. These sites (see paragraph 3.265), are sustainably
located to deliver new housing (and other uses compatible with housing),
because they are closely linked to the existing communities in Attercliffe and
Darnall, close to the neighbourhood centre at Attercliffe, and are consistent with
policy C1 ‘Access to Local Services and Community Facilities in New Residential
Developments’ . The area around the Stadium, within the proposed General
Employment Area boundary, is detached from the areas where the transition to
housing would be expected, and there are currently no identified development
opportunities to deliver housing in line with CS28. The masterplan work did not
consider that there may be future opportunity in this location. Even if there were,
(see paragraph 2.132) it would not be consistent with CS21.
2.122 However, were circumstances to change around the stadium, see paragraph
2.135, and this area might be reconsidered as a logical longer-term extension to
the existing Flexible Use Area at Attercliffe. Also, because it is a large site, it
could still retain some flexibility to deliver sport-related leisure and employment
uses in parts of the area, such as along Attercliffe Common, as long as they are
compatible with any new housing. Further work to investigate opportunities for
this would need to be commissioned at the appropriate time.
General Employment Area
2.123 The General Employment Area is the more appropriate type of mixed use area
here because it brings the sports and leisure uses into one policy area and
supports its role as both a leisure destination and major employment area,
consistent with the explicit provisions of policy CS21.
2.124 Whilst the Don Valley Stadium exists, or there is some potential to retain
sports/leisure uses in this area, then a General Employment Area reflects the
opportunities in a zone that already contains a cluster of leisure and recreation
uses that can be marketed to visitors as such. Investors will be attracted by the
cluster advantages of locating similar uses together, as the policy does not
prevent domination by a particular type of development where there is a demand.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
2.125 Any development within these areas would benefit from good levels of
accessibility, especially at Alsing Road close to the motorway, but also close to
the Meadowhall interchange, and other areas close to Supertram. However, at
Alsing Road there could be transport impacts from development creating
- 43 -
additional congestion at Junction 34south. As these policy areas could deliver
land uses that attract high levels of visitors, mitigation measures will be needed to
reduce car use in this area, for both congestion and air quality reasons. This
would be dealt with by efficient use of a travel plan.
2.126 Alsing Road is identified as being at the highest level of flood risk and careful
design of development would be vital to minimise or mitigate this risk.
2.127 The equality issues indicate that these areas are very accessible by car, which
could cause problems at night for employees or visitors that do not have access
to a car, but the areas are all close to Supertram, and at Alsing Road it is close to
the interchange at Meadowhall for access to a range of public transport modes.
The areas could provide employment opportunities in an area of low income and
high unemployment.
Consultee Preferences
2.128 Sheffield International Venues 76 supported the designation of the central valley
area as a general employment area at the Emerging Options stage. At the Draft
City Policies and Sites stage Legal and General 77 objected to General
Employment Area as the designation for Valley Centertainment, because it
contains some town centre uses (those formerly defined by PPS4). They
considered that it should be identified as a centre. This was rejected because
Valley Centertainment does not have the range of services expected in a
centre 78. Leisure and restaurant uses should be promoted in town centres rather
than elsewhere. At Preferred Options and Draft Plan stages, Standard Life 79
supported the General Employment Area designation for the Meadowhall Retail
Park because of the flexibility it affords, and wanted the flexibility to specifically
apply to reconfiguration of the retail park. They also asked for it to be renamed
General Commercial Area to reflect the land uses within the area. This was
rejected as the policy name applies city wide and the change proposed would not
reflect the flexible purpose of these areas, which is to promote them for a range
of possible employment generating uses. Any proposed future reconfiguration of
the retail park would not be hindered by this designation or its name, and any
proposals for change would be subject to National and Core Strategy policies on
retail development.
76
Sheffield International Venues Ltd (SIV) was established in 1988 and is the wholly owned operating
company for Sheffield City Trust an independent charity. The company currently manages several sports
and leisure venues in Sheffield.
77
Draft Stage: comment ID 112
78
NPPF Glossary, page 57
79
Preferred Options: comment ID194
- 44 -
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.129 Implementation of the policy area will be primarily through the Development
Management process. The Economy and City Region Background Report sets
out how applications for development in General Employment Areas will be
assessed. It is expected the areas will change and adapt with the operational
needs of the facilities and businesses that already exist. Apart from at Alsing
Road (P00129), at present there are no site allocations here signalling significant
new development opportunity sites.
2.130 The General Employment Area at Alsing Road is identified as a site allocation
(site P00129). It is situated in a prominent location, adjacent the Tinsley viaduct
and the Supertram route to Meadowhall, and it is close to the Meadowhall
Interchange. It should be a particularly attractive site for a range of leisure uses
that would both generate employment and complement uses at the Meadowhall
centre, in line with CS15 ‘Locations for Large Leisure and Cultural Development’.
The flexibility of the underlying policy area also allows an opportunity to deliver a
range of uses reflecting the emphasis on employment uses in the area that is
required by CS7 ‘Meadowhall’. This area is though potentially within the boundary
of land that may be needed for phase 2 of the High Speed Rail (HS2) project.
Details of the consultation on the route are to be announced later in 2013 80.
Dependent on the preferred route decision this may affect delivery of this part of
the General Employment Area whilst the project programme is under
consideration.
2.131 For the General Employment Area around the Woodbourn Stadium, it is
expected that there will be little change to existing land uses here which are
entirely sports related. Although the Stadium has been mothballed for the last two
years, it is proposed for refurbishment and is programmed to reopen after
September 2013. This is primarily to enable the closure of the Don Valley
Stadium announced at the same time as the City Council set its budget for 201314 81. The Woodbourn Stadium will be the focus of the city’s outdoor athletics
facilities formerly hosted the Don Valley Stadium. The other main land use here,
a commercial football venue, is expected to remain.
2.132 The area around the Don Valley Stadium could present the greatest challenge
for delivery of this part of the General Employment Area. The area is dominated
by the Stadium and this provides the focus for CS21 ’Boulevard of Sport’.
Although the City Council proposes that that stadium will close and may be
demolished after September 2013, there is at present no evidence that an
appropriate and viable replacement sports and/or leisure project, or range of
sport related uses could not be proposed to replace it, in line with current Local
80
81
www.hs2.org.uk
Cabinet Agenda 10/4/13
- 45 -
Plan policy. Indeed a proposal for ‘Health and Well Being Park’ comprising a
range of sports related facilities and business opportunities has been the subject
of press coverage during March 2013, 82 and further work on the feasibility and
delivery of such a project is being considered.
Flexibility and Risk
2.133 The aim of the General Employment Area in the Lower Don Valley is to create
flexibility for a wide range of uses, with no preferred uses, and assist regeneration
of former industrial areas.
2.134 However, the extent of flexibility allowed may create risks for delivery. There is a
risk that a genuine mixture of uses, or flexibility to deliver new land uses that
support and strengthen the sports/leisure area emphasis may be lost if, say, the
area is flooded with one type of land use (for example large scale leisure), or is
under pressure for another type of employment land use to dominate (for
example B2 or B8) because it is close to already existing similar areas in
Attercliffe. Conversely, not having preferred land uses, and hence more
certainty, may result in a reluctance to invest in the area, especially for the more
risky sports and leisure type land uses where regeneration funding is very
uncertain or may not be available.
2.135 There is also the risk of significant change in an area (either Council policy
change, or physical change) that could mean the uses proposed for the policy
area or part of the policy area are no longer deliverable. In 2009, when the Core
Strategy and policy CS21 were adopted, there was no evidence to suggest there
would be major change that would affect the continuation of major sport/leisure
facilities in this area, such as the recent Council budget decision to withdraw
funding from Don Valley Stadium. There is still a risk that no suitable and viable
major sport or leisure use will be able to continue around the Don Valley Stadium
once it is closed.
2.136 In that case, there might be pressure for alternative land uses to be brought
forward here, and this may include housing as an extension to the Flexible Use
Area around the canal at Attercliffe, especially given the need to identify
additional land for housing in the city. The flexibility of the General Employment
Area would not be sufficient to accommodate this possibility, but the problems of
introducing housing at present suggest that the proposed designation would
remain the more appropriate.
Monitoring
2.137 There are no requirements to maintain dominance for particular uses in these
areas. The mix of uses and dominance of any uses within General Employment
82
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-21752994
- 46 -
Areas will be reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further
information is provided in the Economy and City Region Background Report.
Conclusions on Souindness of General Employment Policy Area
2.138 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.139 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed development requirements to deliver land for
employment and leisure uses set out in the Lower Don Valley Masterplan,
in sustainable and accessible locations (paragraph 2.107).
2.140 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy
specifically policies CS15 ‘Locations for Large Leisure and Cultural
Developments’ and CS21 ‘The Boulevard of Sport’ (paragraphs 2.104).
•
It is the most appropriate considered against alternative land uses, as it
provides flexibility for a mix of employment uses that can take full
advantage of the proximity of the Meadowhall Centre and Transport
Interchange, and the location of a cluster of sport/leisure uses that already
exist in the central part of the valley (paragraph 2.123).
2.141 It is effective:
•
Because the areas have maximum flexibility to deliver a range of
employment generating uses, including built leisure, in prominent locations
with good accessibility by a range of transport modes (paragraph 2.133).
2.142 It is consistent with national policy:
•
These areas encourage development that ‘promote mixed use
developments and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land’
(NPPF paragraph 17).
•
These areas provide for situations where for proposals for main town
centre uses, in this case large scale leisure, which cannot be
accommodated in or adjacent to the City Centre, (NPPF Objective 2
‘Ensuring the vitality of Town Centres’).
- 47 -
District Centre Policy Area
2.143 One District Centre is proposed in the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy area, at
Darnall around Main Road (B6200). The preferred uses in this policy area are
shops and community facilities.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.144 By defining a clear boundary to the district centre this policy area supports NPPF
objective 2. ‘Ensuring the vitality of town centres’. It states
‘Recognise town centres as the heart of communities and pursue policies
to support their viability and vitality’.
This is supported by CS35, ‘Darnall District Centre’ 83 which is about promoting
the regeneration of the centre (see paragraph 2.148).
2.145 At Objective 8 ‘Promoting Healthy Communities’ (paragraph 70) the NPPF states
that planning should ensure that established shops, facilities and services are
able to develop and modernise in a way that is sustainable, and retained for the
benefit of the community. The definition of a strong district centre boundary on
the Proposals Map will support development and modernisation within the centre.
2.146 The allocation of a site within the Darnall Centre for uses to support the centre
(see P00185 Station Road) supports point 6 in paragraph 23, which refers to
allocation of suitable sites to meet the development needs of the centre.
Core Strategy
2.147 Policy CS34 ‘District Centres’ 84confirms Darnall as a District Centre. The centre
is specifically identified as one for improvement to help strengthen the local
housing market and improve the physical environment.
2.148 Core Strategy policy CS35 relates specifically to Darnall Centre and states that
regeneration, renewal and expansion of the district centre will be promoted to
provide a wider range of retail and other services. The designation within a
District Centre on the Proposals Map makes the preference for retail uses and
community facilities explicit and helps to deliver the Core Strategy policy.
Other strategies or policies
Darnall Attercliffe and Tinsley Neighbourhood Development Framework
83
84
Core Strategy, page 78
Core Strategy, page 77
- 48 -
2.149 The role and function of the Darnall Centre and the importance of its local identity
is supported in the Darnall, Attercliffe and Tinsley NDF 85. The vision for the area
in this document includes this role for the District centre. It states:
‘Everybody can easily safely and comfortably access the range of quality services
and facilities necessary to enable them to live more sustainable and healthy
lifestyles’.
2.150 Darnall Centre forms the heart of the Darnall community and the NDF document
includes a specific vision for the centre that refers to high quality environment, a
full range of retail, leisure, and employment opportunities, and accessible by all
forms of transport. This document stresses the importance of improvement of the
range of services, and enhancement of the retail function of the Darnall Centre as
this is a key location in the east of the city, and the only District Centre within the
Lower Don Valley. The policy area designation supports this with its preference
for retail uses and community facilities along with a range of other acceptable
uses.
Thriving District and Local Centres
2.151 A strategy aimed at improving centres across the city has been developed as part
of the Council’s ‘Better Neighbourhoods’ regeneration project 86, and will be an
important part of delivering a good district centre for the Darnall community.
2.152 Priorities for improvement in Darnall were identified over the summer of 2011 by
traders and centre users as part of a city-wide consultation on the draft strategy,
and included issues such as improving the quality and attractiveness of the public
realm, ensuring centres have a good range of shops and services, minimising the
number of empty units. As a part of this strategy, a project to work with traders,
landowners, and community organisations to look at regeneration and service
improvement within the centre has developed. It is looking at various measures,
such as how to optimise the use of resources in the centre, including bringing
some services together; together with landowners assembling land to identify
development opportunities; and bidding for funding such as Local Growth Fund
for public realm and shop front improvement. A clear centre boundary and
supporting area policy is an important foundation on which to base a strategy for
the improvement of the centre.
Justification
2.153 District Centres have an important role as focal points for neighbourhood areas
within the city and for strengthening local identity. They are likely to have a more
85
86
Chapter 4 page 31, and Chapter 6 page 51
www.sheffield.gov.uk/Thriving Centres
- 49 -
secure future if they can attract both public and private investment and be
conveniently situated and/or very accessible for users.
2.154 The District Centre boundary identifies where the community focal point is
located, and where district centre uses should be located to deliver its role and
function. It is also important that the centre is attractive to investors and retailers,
especially where they can bring in a wider range of retail or other services, or fill a
gap or vacant unit, and it’s important that the centre is not overly diluted by uses
that do not contribute to its function, or uses outside the centre boundary that
would affect its attractiveness, and this is supported by the aims of CS35.
Alternative Options
2.155 In view of the Core Strategy, there were no meaningful alternative options for the
centre as a whole but there were choices about the boundary.
2.156 The boundary of the Darnall District Centre is drawn to reflect the core areas of
retail use that are to be protected. The District Centre is centred on the western
side of Greenland Road and its boundary curtailed at Acres Hill Road. It is
expanded at the north end to include the GP surgery at York Road.
2.157 An alternative option was to extend the boundary across Greenland Road, as
shown on the UDP. This was rejected as this area is primarily residential in
character with only limited retail frontage to Greenland Road. These frontages
are located across a major road from the core area of the centre and perform a
limited role for the District Centre. Given the physical separation from the main
centre it may be difficult to ensure that this area stays primarily in A1 shop use or
community facility use as set out in policy C4 ‘Development in District and
Neighbourhood Centres’ 87. Those areas outside the District Centre boundary fall
within Housing Areas, where the retail use is acceptable but there is no
preference for this use as a part of the District Centre.
Sustainability Issues
2.158 The sustainability appraisal for possible sites located within the centre showed
that it is a sustainable location for a district centre, close to the housing areas it
serves and on a high frequency bus route. Significant positive impacts would
arise from an improved physical environment and better quality shopping (see
site allocation P00185 Station Road).
Equality Issues
2.159 The equality appraisal for sites located within the centre show that it would
provide excellent employment opportunities in a priority area, as there is very
good public transport access, and many pedestrian routes from the surrounding
87
Core Strategy, page 40
- 50 -
area to the centre. This is particularly relevant for an area with a high
concentration of Black and Minority Ethnic people who would benefit particularly
from good quality local centre facilities.
Consultee Preferences
2.160 At both the Preferred Options and Draft Plan stages, agents acting for Legal and
General 88objected to the exclusion of the B&Q store on Greenland Road from
the boundary of the District Centre. The comment refers to limited development
opportunities within the existing centre for retail expansion, and considers that the
B&Q site provides an appropriate expansion to the centre because there are
existing links to the District Centre and surrounding area by pedestrian and cycle
crossing facilities linking across Greenland Road. Inclusion of the B&Q site within
the District Centre would also help to improve the retail offer of the centre and its
mixture of uses in line with the objectives of the Darnall Attercliffe and Tinsley
Neighbourhood Development Framework. This view was rejected, as the
inclusion of this site within the District Centre would not necessarily contribute to
the regeneration of the Darnall Centre, it could have the opposite effect as the
ring road is a major barrier, and the distance from the core area of the District
Centre at Main Road/Staniforth Road would not encourage linked trips by
shoppers. A compact district centre not divided by any major barrier is the focus
for regeneration work.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.161 Implementation of the policy area would be primarily by the Development
Management process and by private sector investment. The Neighbourhoods
Background Report sets out how applications for development in District Centres
will be assessed. It is expected the centre will change and adapt along with the
facilities and businesses that already exist using policy C4 ‘Development in
District and Neighbourhood Centres’ to provide additional guidance on the scale
and type of development within the centre to help achieve the objectives of CS35.
2.162 See also site allocation P00185 Station Road (paragraph 3.174) which has been
identified within the centre as an opportunity to bring a major new facility close to
all the main facilities of the centre.
2.163 There are opportunities for the renewal of existing facilities, including
improvements to the pedestrian environment, and renewal or improvement of
existing retail units, which the policy area would allow. Consultation on options
for centre improvements will take place with traders, landowners, and centre
users during 2013, once the preparatory work identified in 2.152 is complete. One
of the main projects for centre improvement is a shop front improvement scheme
88
Preferred Options comment ID 1473, Draft City Policies and Sites and Proposals Map comment ID 183
- 51 -
which subject to trader/landlord support may commence by summer 2013.
Delivery of environmental improvements will enhance the chances of further
investor interest.
Flexibility and Risk
2.164 There is a risk that no significant development will take place here, in that case
the District Centre is likely to remain as existing. The main threat for this centre is
from continuation of vacant units contributing to the ‘run down’ appearance of the
centre. However, a flexible policy framework is in place which provided 50% of
the street frontage is retained in preferred uses (A1 retail, or D1 community
facilities) there is a range of acceptable other land uses that would be supported
within the centre.
2.165 Current funding for regeneration of the centre is limited and small scale, and
there is uncertainty about future funding. There is a risk that it may not make a
significant enough impact to encourage new investment that will contribute to
regeneration.
2.166 There is a risk that important district centre facilities (such as the library) may be
lost or cease to operate a full service, or existing businesses choose to close or
relocate elsewhere, customers may then be drawn to other centres leading to
less confidence in the centre.
2.167 Investors may delay development or improvements to premises because of the ,
uncertainty about delivery of projects that contribute to centre regeneration, and
current poor economic climate where retailers are struggling, all leading to longer
term vacant units in the centre
Monitoring
2.168 The mix of uses and dominance of uses within the District Centre will be
reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is
provided in the Neighbourhoods Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of District Centre Policy Area
2.169 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.170 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed requirements needed to support and promote
regeneration of the centre set out in the Neighbourhood Development
Framework (paragraph 2.149), and the Thriving Centres Strategy
(paragraph 2.151).
- 52 -
2.171 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy
specifically policy CS35 ‘Darnall Centre’ (paragraph 2.147).
•
It is the most appropriate boundary for the centre when considered against
alternatives. It reflects existing core areas of retail use and promotes a
compact boundary that avoids separation of the centre by the Outer Ring
Road (paragraph 2.157).
2.172 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as this is an existing District Centre.
2.173 It is consistent with national policy:
•
A clear boundary to the district centre, supported by the promotion of
regeneration in policy CS35 supports NPPF objective 2. ‘Ensuring the
vitality of town centres’.
•
Identification and promotion of this area as a District Centre will support
retention of existing shops and services and enable them to develop for the
benefit of the community (NPPF Objective 8 ‘Promoting Healthy
Communities’).
Neighbourhood Centre Policy Area
2.174 There are two Neighbourhood Centres in the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy
Area. These are at Attercliffe along Attercliffe Road (A6178) and at Tinsley
Highgate, located on Bawtry Road (A631).
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.175 The identification of Neighbourhood Centres on the Proposals Map where shops
and community facilities are the preferred use, in locations convenient for those
living and working in surrounding areas, is consistent with the NPPF at Objective
8 ‘Promoting Healthy Communities’ (paragraph 70). The NPPF states that
planning should ensure that established shops, facilities and services are able to
develop and modernise in a way that is sustainable, and retained for the benefit
of the community.
- 53 -
Core Strategy
2.176 Policy CS39 ‘Neighbourhood Centres’ 89 provides for local shops and community
facilities that are needed to serve the everyday needs of the community. The
relevant neighbourhood centres are translated onto the Proposals Map at
Attercliffe and Tinsley.
Other strategies or policies
2.177 The high street at Attercliffe is a priority project within the Attercliffe Action Plan 90.
It envisages an environment where people will want to run a business, visit and
shop. It will be achieved by addressing public realm, shop frontage, and building
façade improvements, and changing the traffic dominated perception of the area.
Funding bids are being made, for example, to the Local Growth Fund towards
public realm improvements. A forum with local businesses has been established
in order to draw on their ideas and expertise, and establish partnership working to
drive forward the Action Plan priorities. The boundary of the Attercliffe Centre will
define the context for centre improvements.
Justification
2.178 These centres give a sense of place and valuable local service to the surrounding
areas. For example the identity of Attercliffe is centred on the main Attercliffe
Road which is part of the main highway through the valley, but also signals this is
the focal point of the Attercliffe community, where shops and local services come
together. Highgate is centrally located within Tinsley at Bawtry Road surrounded
by residential development that makes up the Tinsley community.
Alternative Options
2.179 The boundaries at Attercliffe and Tinsley reflect the areas where, using the
provisions of policy C4 ‘Development in District and Neighbourhood Centres’ 91,
the shopping centre function can be protected, and investment to ensure the
centre thrives will be encouraged. The needs of areas where shopping is not
viable are better served by designation as Housing or Flexible Use Areas to allow
a wider range of new uses to come forward and this would not preclude edge-ofcentre development where appropriate.
2.180 For similar reasons the small shopping areas along Staniforth Road, Clipstone
Gardens, Handsworth Road/Willow Road and Handsworth Road/Parkway
roundabout that are shown as Local Shopping Centres in the UDP, are
redesignated as parts of the Housing Area.
89
Core Strategy, page 81
Attercliffe Action Plan, page 19. See: www.sheffield.gov.uk/attercliffe-action-plan
91
Core Strategy, page 40
90
- 54 -
2.181 It is proposed to redraw the boundary of the Attercliffe Centre in the UDP to
reflect the core areas of retail use that are to be protected and be consistent with
the boundary of the Attercliffe Action Plan.
2.182 The alternative would be to retain the boundary at Attercliffe as shown on the
UDP. But, this covered a larger area than is actually functioning as part of the
retail area and many of the shops on the fringes have been lost to non retail uses.
In reality, the numbers of actual retail units along Attercliffe Road is small and
retail use may no longer be viable along the whole length as shown on the UDP,
but those that are there can remain.
2.183 The boundary of the Tinsley Centre remains unchanged to that shown on the
UDP.
2.184 No alternative options were considered for Tinsley. The centre is a purpose-built
shopping parade and this defines the boundary.
Sustainability Issues
2.185 In general sustainability terms all of the centres are close, usually within walking
distance, of the housing areas they serve. The provision and safeguarding of
local facilities will reduce the need for residents to travel long distances to access
facilities they may need on a daily basis.
Equality Issues
2.186 The provision of local shops and services will benefit groups with poor mobility
and poor access to private transport (which will benefit young people and some
black and minority ethnic groups). Although the range of goods is less than at
District Centres, Neighbourhood Centres still provide opportunity for local
convenience goods and could provide some local employment opportunities in a
priority area.
Consultee Preferences
2.187 There were no consultee comments relating to the Neighbourhood Centres in the
Lower Don Valley.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.188 Implementation of the policy area would be primarily by the Development
Management process and private sector investment as uses grow or adapt within
centres, or units become vacant and change hands. Development Management
will play an important role in maintaining a sustainable balance of uses within
- 55 -
each centre. The Neighbourhoods Background Report sets out how applications
for development in Neighbourhood Centres will be assessed.
2.189 In the Attercliffe Centre some change will also be delivered by negotiation with
developers to implement the projects identified in the Attercliffe Action Plan, see
reference at paragraph 2.177. Proposals to bring forward new housing into
Attercliffe as supported by Core Strategy policy CS28 and site allocations
P00134, P00154, P00184, P00194, P00195, and P00202 will all bring forward
new customers to further support this centre, (see from paragraph 3.265 for sites
details) .
Flexibility and Risk
2.190 There is a risk that these centres or parts of centres are underused and
businesses may struggle to remain viable or be attractive to investors. There is
always a risk that units may remain long term vacant.
2.191 There is flexibility to allow other land uses within centres provided the preferred
A1 and D1 uses remain in the majority along the street frontage. In centres
where demand is low this may lead to a risk that other uses, such as conversion
to residential, or small business uses, may creep into a centre and eventually
become dominant, see paragraph 2.188.
Monitoring
2.192 The mix and dominance of uses within these Policy Areas will be reassessed as
part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is provided in
the Neighbourhoods Background Report.
Conclusions on Souindness of Neighbourhood Centre Policy Area
2.193 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.194 It is positively prepared:
•
They identify where areas of local shops and services in the Lower Don
Valley are located that should be protected, and new investment
encouraged, in order to serve the surrounding communities.
2.195 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy in
policy CS39 ‘Neighbourhood Centres’, (paragraph 2.176).
•
It identifies where viable areas of local shops should be retained
(paragraph 2.179).
- 56 -
2.196 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as these centres already exist and
investment and any projects that support them is supported by the
Development Management Process (paragraph 2.188).
2.197 It is consistent with national policy:
•
Neighbourhood Centres shown on the Proposals Map in locations
convenient for those living and working in surrounding areas is needed to
support retention and investment in shops, facilities and services for the
benefit of the community (NPPF Objective 8 ‘Promoting Healthy
Communities’).
Meadowhall Shopping Centre Policy Area
2.198 This policy area is defined by the extent of the Meadowhall Centre and its
surrounding car parking areas at Meadowhall Way. The Proposals Map gives the
Meadowhall Centre a unique ‘Meadowhall Shopping Centre’ policy area
designation, reflecting its current use as a regional shopping centre.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.199 National policy gives priority to town centres, and refers to identification of a
hierarchy of centres in the plan (in this case the District and Neighbourhood
Centres) that are protected for this function, see NPPF Objective 2 ‘Ensuring the
vitality of town centres’. The Meadowhall Centre does not qualify as a town
centre as it lacks the range of uses typically expected there, and does not provide
a “diverse retail offer” (paragraph 23).
2.200 However, the plan has to recognise that the centre exists and is thriving. Its tight
boundary referred to above reflects that national policy does not support this type
of location (see NPPF paragraph 24.) and prevents expansion that could further
compete with the City Centre, but is flexible enough to allow for reconfiguration
within its boundary to meet modern comparison retailing needs.
Core Strategy
2.201 Policy CS14 ‘City-wide Distribution of Shopping and Leisure Development’ 92
envisages that Meadowhall will continue to be a major regional draw, but, that
there will be a continued focus on City Centre regeneration to draw investment in.
92
Core Strategy, page 49
- 57 -
This means that shopping space at the Meadowhall Centre should not expand
beyond around its current capacity. CS14 confirms that Meadowhall will stay at
around its present size, and City Policy B3 ’Shopping and Leisure Development
and Community Facilities outside Existing Centres’ 93 sets out additional local
criteria for location of shopping and leisure facilities outside of existing centres.
See also Economy and City Region Policy Background Report.
2.202 Policy CS7 ’ Meadowhall’ 94 proposes employment as the predominant land use
and promotes a ‘mixed use’ approach to bring new land uses into the area
around Meadowhall. In line with CS14, it reiterates that the shopping centre will
remain at around its present size.
Justification
2.203 The Meadowhall centre is confirmed as an important economic and employment
land use, and the boundary for the shopping centre corresponds with Core
strategy policy CS7 indicating that the shopping centre will remain at around its
present size. Creating a mix of land uses on neighbouring policy areas around
Meadowhall (see paragraphs 1.25 and 2.10 above) would allow the location to
broaden its role without expanding as a shopping development.
Alternative Options
2.204 In the UDP the Meadowhall Centre and its car parking areas were designated a
Regional Shopping Centre, and an alternative option was to maintain this
boundary. However, a tighter boundary is needed to support policies CS7 and
CS14 relating to the size of the shopping centre. Land to the north (Alsing Road)
and south (Weedon Street area) are now designated as General Employment
Area and Business Area respectively (see paragraphs 2.100 and 2.2 above),
which supports the mixed use approach set out in the Lower Don Valley
Masterplan and Vision and supports the principles of CS7.
Sustainability Issues
2.205 The sustainability appraisals of sites in this area has shown that a key impact
would be from uses that generate large amounts of traffic and indicate that impact
would be considerable at Junction 34south without mitigation. For any
development proposals in and around the existing shopping centre, support for
wider use of public transport should be a requirement taking advantage of the
close location of the Meadowhall Interchange.
93
94
City Policies and Sites, page 29
Core Strategy, page 41
- 58 -
Equality Issues
2.206 The equality appraisal for sites in this policy area has shown that this area
(including the shopping centre) is very accessible by car but also close to the
Interchange for a range of public transport options, which would benefit those
without access to private transport. The acceptable uses in the shopping centre
can also provide employment opportunities in an area of low income and high
unemployment.
Consultee Preferences
2.207 There were no consultee comments on the boundary of the Meadowhall policy
area.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.208 Whilst the centre would continue within its current boundary, the Development
Management process will support proposals for reconfiguration of the centre
within the limits set by policies CS14, CS7 and B3.
Flexibility and Risk
2.209 As demand is expected to be maintained at this centre there is no expectation
that the acceptable uses would not be viable.
Monitoring
2.210 The mix and dominance of uses within the Meadowhall Policy Area will be
reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is
provided in the economy and City Region Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Meadowhall Shopping Centre Policy Area
2.211 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.212 It is positively prepared:
•
It recognises that the shopping centre already exists and is thriving
(paragraph 2.200).
2.213 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy
specifically policies CS14 ’City-wide Distribution of Shopping and Leisure
Development’ and CS7 ’Meadowhall’ (paragraphs 2.201 and 2.202).
- 59 -
•
The tight boundary reflects that national policy does not promote this type
of location (paragraph 2.200).
2.214 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as the centre already exists and is able
to reconfigure within its boundary if appropriate (paragraph 2.208).
2.215 It is consistent with national policy:
•
Designation recognises the centre exists but the tight boundary preventing
further spatial expansion of the centre is consistent with the priority given to
town centres (NPPF Objective 2 ‘Ensuring the vitality of town centres’).
Housing Policy Area
2.216 The Housing Areas in the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy areas are all long
standing and well-established residential areas. They are located in the
communities of Darnall around Darnall Road and Staniforth Road, to the west
of Prince of Wales Road around Mather Road and Halsall Road, around
Bowden Wood Road, and along both sides of Main Road towards Handsworth.
There is also a significant area of housing at Tinsley between Bawtry Road and
Ferrars Road. A small area at Infield Lane in Darnall formerly shown as Open
Space Area (former smallholdings) and Industrial Area (warehouse) is now
shown as a Housing Area (see site allocation P00500 Infield Lane).
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.217 Housing policy areas support Core Planning Principle number 6. ‘Delivering a
wide choice of high quality homes’, identifying where housing should be the
dominant land use and allocating sites within the Housing Area that will deliver
the new properties (see also site allocations P00181, P00412 and P00500 from
paragraph 3.200).
Core Strategy
2.218 Core Strategy policy CS23 ‘Locations for New Housing’ 95, sets out the overall
approach to the location of land for housing. The designated Housing Areas here
follow from the spatial strategy with its focus on development in the main built-up
area of the city. In addition policy CS28 ’Housing in Attercliffe and Darnall’ 96
95
96
Core Strategy, page 63
Core Strategy, page 69
- 60 -
focuses on the area around the canal at Attercliffe, and the potential for this area
to bring forward new areas for housing, see Flexible Use Area designation at
paragraph 2.236.
Justification
2.219 This policy area reflects the current extent of housing areas within Darnall and
Attercliffe. These areas together with the Flexible Use areas described above
will create opportunities to widen the choice of housing available in Darnall and
reflecting the objectives set out in the Darnall, Attercliffe and Tinsley NDF to
improve and strengthen the local housing market 97.
Alternative Options
2.220 Generally the Housing Area designation now proposed is the same as that shown
on the UDP. No alternatives were proposed because these are stable housing
areas and little change is likely.
2.221 At Tinsley the neighbouring residential area at Brinsworth (in Rotherham District)
is similarly identified for limited settlement change and the boundary in this
option is consistent with this 98.
2.222 The area around the canal at Attercliffe is identified as an area with potential to
deliver some new housing over the plan period, but is proposed as Flexible Use
area rather than Housing Area, this is because in these areas although housing
is expected to be a key regeneration driver some flexibility to deliver new land
uses is still required. The reasons for not proposing Housing Area in those
cases are considered in the evidence for those areas, see paragraph 2.246.
Sustainability Issues
2.223 The Sustainability Appraisal carried out for sites in this policy designation
generally identifies the sites as sustainable for residential use providing a
contribution to a range and choice of housing in the Lower Don Valley.
Equality Issues
2.224 The equality appraisals carried out for sites within the housing policy area all
show positive indicators, reflecting their general accessibility. Many areas are
close to high frequency bus routes or the Supertram route or to everyday facilities
such as shops, health facilities, and primary schools. This greatly benefits young
people, disabled people, and residents without access to a car.
97
98
Darnall, Attercliffe and Tinsley NDF Chapter 4: Vision
Rotherham Borough Council, Core Strategy, Spatial Options Report, May 2009, table 6.1
- 61 -
Consultee Preferences
2.225 There were no consultee comments relating specifically to the housing policy
area designation.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.226 Implementation of the policy area would be primarily by the Development
Management process, using policy C1 ’Access to Local Services and Community
Facilities in New Residential Developments’ 99 to ensure that new development is
integrated with existing communities, and residents have convenient access to
public transport and other key local services. The Neighbourhoods Background
Report sets out how applications for development in Housing Policy Areas will be
assessed.
2.227 Sites P00181 Ouse Road, P00412 Chapelwood, and P00500 Infield Lane have
all been allocated to deliver new housing within the housing policy area (see from
paragraph 3.200). Completion of these sites is expected to be in the medium
term (by 2021) This is because demand is proving slower than expected when
the Core Strategy was prepared and so some areas for new housing will take
longer to develop.
Flexibility and Risk
2.228 Generally the Housing Areas are well established. They are located at a distance
from the Lower Don Valley industrial areas that may create nuisance, or have a
buffer area such as a main road between them, so overall risks look slight. Little
larger scale development is expected, though there may be opportunities for
small scale infill development as local areas change and land uses move around.
Flexibility is available within the policy area for complementary uses provided that
housing remains the dominant land use, see policy H1.
2.229 Risk is mainly related to the economic climate and site specific conditions that
may mean some sites are less complicated or cheaper to bring forward. There is
a risk that any regeneration funding that may assist the delivery of some of these
sites may not be available. This could mean land lying unused for longer. There is
still a large long-term need for housing, so it is expected that the sites will be
developed within the plan period even if they do take longer to bring forward.
99
City Policies and Sites, page 33
- 62 -
Monitoring
2.230 The mix of uses and dominance of uses within Housing Policy Areas will be
reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is
provided in the Neighbourhoods Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Housing Policy Area
2.231 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.232 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed development requirements for the future
supply of housing, and supports the continuation of existing stable
residential areas.
2.233 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy
specifically policy CS23 ’Locations for New Housing’, and CS28 ’Housing in
Attercliffe and Darnall’ (paragraph 2.218).
•
It is the most appropriate given that these are generally long established
residential areas with little potential for change, (paragraph 2.220).
2.234 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as these are already stable housing
areas, and new housing opportunities are set out in site allocations
(P00181, P00196, P00412, and P00500) (paragraph 2.227).
2.235 It is consistent with national policy:
•
Consistent with NPPF Core Planning Principle number 6. ‘Delivering a wide
choice of high quality homes’. It identifies where housing should be the
dominant land use and has site allocations that will deliver new properties.
Flexible Use Policy Area
2.236 A Flexible Use Area designation is proposed at Attercliffe alongside the canal
from Worthing Road at the southern end of the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy
Area to Coleridge Road in the north of the area.
- 63 -
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.237 This Flexible Use Area specifically supports the ninth Core Planning Principle at
paragraph 17. This includes, ‘to promote mixed use developments and
encourage multiple benefits from the use of land’.
2.238 The main purpose of these policy areas is to deliver the benefits envisaged in
national policy, by enabling mixed development led by new housing uses to come
forward in areas that are in transition from older, underused, mainly industrial
land uses. They introduce potential for a mixture of housing and other compatible
uses to come forward that would best serve the regeneration needs of the
particular areas.
2.239 These housing-led regeneration areas also support Core Planning Principle
number 6 ‘Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes’. By including housing
as an acceptable use within the policy area, they can help to deliver much
needed new homes. These could contribute to sustainable inclusive and mixed
communities where ones do not currently exist.
Core Strategy
2.240 Core Strategy policy CS28 ’Housing in Attercliffe and Darnall’ 100 is aimed
primarily at the area designated as Flexible Use Area in the Lower Don Valley
and supports the principles set out in paragraph 2.237 for national policy. The
area is promoted for a new mix of land uses, including new housing that will
support the renewal of the areas between Darnall and Attercliffe alongside the
canal.
Darnall, Attercliffe, and Tinsley Neighbourhood Development Framework
2.241 The DAT NDF identifies this area as Attercliffe Waterside 101. The vision for the
area is for a dynamic new neighbourhood for Darnall and Attercliffe which
capitalises on the canal corridor with opportunity for the transformation of this
currently mixed industrial area into an attractive, vibrant and sustainable
residential community. This supports policy CS28.
Justification
2.242 The area contains a lot of disused and underused former industrial land, and this
flexible approach provides for housing-led development that would benefit from
100
101
Core Strategy, page 69
Darnall, Attercliffe and Tinsley NDF, paragraph 6.22
- 64 -
an attractive canalside frontage as a driver to bring about the regeneration of this
area.
2.243 There is no one preferred land use within Flexible Use Areas, but housing is
expected to be the key regeneration driver here. However, it is recognised that it
would be premature to designate it as a full Housing Area. Flexible Use Area
designation provides the conditions in which a Housing Area could emerge, at
least in part of the area. There is currently very little housing in the locality and it
needs to rebuild its reputation as a residential location and make the most of the
waterside location as a focal point. At the edges of the area where it abuts
employment areas, the policy area has flexibility to accommodate land uses
(such as business uses) that can act as a buffer between new housing and the
industrial area beyond. Flexible Use Area designation also allows for more
flexibility of layout as dictated by site constraints as well as providing a genuine
opportunity to recreate a mixed community where housing and employment
locations can be located together.
Alternative Options
2.244 The Flexible Use Area is largely the same as the former Mixed Use Area at
Attercliffe, shown on the UDP Proposals Map. At the draft stage an extension to
the area was shown to include an area at Tinsley Park Road but this was
withdrawn and the area shown as a Business and Industry Area, see paragraph
2.58.
2.245 Small extensions to the former Attercliffe Mixed Use Area have also been made
at Attercliffe Road and Effingham Road (north of the canal) to support landowner
ambitions for housing-led regeneration.
2.246 Housing Area could be an alternative policy area designation. However, this is a
regeneration area where there still exists a mix of older industrial uses and vacant
and underused land. For a Housing Area policy H1 would require that housing be
the preferred and dominant land use across the policy area 102. Parts of this area,
especially the area on the north bank of the canal, may not be suitable for
housing due to pockets of remaining industrial use close by, and the proximity of
industrial uses in Attercliffe, but they may be suitable for uses that complement
housing, and for employment uses that would contribute to a mixed use
community.
2.247 Site P00196 Staniforth Depot is included within this area promoted for housing
led regeneration in the masterplan, but this area is shown as Housing Area rather
than Flexible Use. This is because the site is directly next to existing areas of
housing at Staniforth Road and Shirland Lane, and its current use does not cause
harm to existing nearby housing, see also Chapter 3 paragraph 3.219.
102
Policy H1 States in Housing Areas 70% of the area should be in housing use.
- 65 -
2.248 Other types of policy area were not considered as options because they would
not reflect the aims of CS28 or the objectives of the DAT NDF.
Sustainability Issues
2.249 The regeneration impact of this area will depend on the scale and nature of
development. Creation of a new community by bringing in housing as a
significant land use, close to good transport links, and close to employment
opportunities in the wider Lower Don Valley is a significant regeneration tool in a
very sustainable location. This option contributes considerably to the aims of the
masterplanning work, offering opportunities to broaden choice of housing, reusing
redundant brownfield land for a new land use, offering opportunities to create a
new high quality environment. The remaining industry adjacent to the area and
some remaining within it may mean housing is close to potential sources of noise
and other pollution. Removal of the existing non conforming uses will lead to
improved environment for the residential area close by.
Equality Issues
2.250 Parts of the area are very accessible, being close to a high frequency bus route
along Staniforth Road, and the Supertram stops at Woodbourn Road and
Attercliffe. Also the area is close to a good range of facilities both by walking and
by public transport, and to a range of employment opportunities in the wider
Lower Don Valley. This would benefit those without access to private transport
particularly young people, and black and minority ethnic groups who are a
significant part of the local population.
Consultee Preferences
2.251 The designation of the Flexible Use Area at Attercliffe was supported by the main
landowners at the Preferred Options stage 103. The area at Tinsley Park Road is
dealt with in paragraph 2.58.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.252 Implementation of the policy area would be primarily by development
management. The Neighbourhoods Background Report sets out how
applications for development in Flexible Use Policy Areas will be assessed.
2.253 There is also a joint approach by landowners at Attercliffe to bring forward
redevelopment of their sites in a coordinated way. The landowners carried out
their own studies to ascertain viability for several combinations of land uses and
103
Duke of Norfolk Estate Comment ID 769, British Waterways Board Comment ID 1438 and Commercial
Estates Comment ID 2057
- 66 -
as a result are supportive of the allocations of sites within the Flexible Use Area.
They have declared their intention to carry out further detailed masterplanning but
have yet to confirm a timetable for this.
Flexibility and Risk
2.254 The extent of flexibility allowed may give rise to problems to be addressed. There
is a risk that a genuine mixture of uses or flexibility to deliver new land uses and
regenerate the area may be lost if, say, the area is flooded with one type of land
use (for example new housing). Conversely, not having preferred land uses may
result in a reluctance to invest in the area. Where there is reduced certainty
about what other uses may come in, there may be a reluctance for employment
uses to locate next to housing for fear of constraints on operators. Several issues
along these lines were raised during the Emerging Options consultation for sites
in this area.
2.255 A comprehensive and planned approach to delivery of new land uses as
proposed by landowners for sites around the canal should address this risk, see
paragraph 2.253.
Monitoring
2.256 There are no requirements to maintain dominance for particular uses in these
areas, however, the mix and dominance of uses within Flexible Use Policy Areas
will be reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information
is provided in the Neighbourhoods Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Flexible Use Policy Area
2.257 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.258 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed development requirements to deliver
regeneration to an area between Attercliffe and Darnall along the canal as
set out in the Darnall, Attercliffe and Tinsley NDF (paragraph 2.241).
2.259 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives for reuse of former industrial
land already in the Core Strategy, specifically CS28 ‘Housing in Attercliffe
and Darnall’, to promote a new mix of land uses, including new housing
(paragraph 2.240).
•
It is the most appropriate when considered against the other alternative
policy areas as it provides flexibility for a mix of uses across the area given
- 67 -
that there is still some pockets of industrial use, and areas close to
remaining industrial areas at Attercliffe that would not be suitable for
sensitive land uses (paragraph 2.243).
2.260 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as it is located within an area identified
for regeneration and the landowners are supportive of this approach
(paragraph 2.251).
2.261 It is consistent with national policy:
•
This area supports the national policy principle that promotes ‘mixed use
development and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land’. As
there is potential for a mixture of housing and other compatible uses to
come forward that would best serve the regeneration needs of this area
(NPPF paragraph 17).
•
Promotion of housing led regeneration can help to deliver sustainable
inclusive and mixed communities where ones do not currently exist, (NPPF
Core principle 6 ‘Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes’).
Waste Management Policy Area
2.262 A Waste Management Policy Area is proposed at Bernard Road (the site of the
incinerator) and at the adjacent Lumley Street.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.263 PPS10 Sustainable Waste Management (rather than the NPPF) will remain as
the national policy on this subject until the proposed ‘English Waste Management
Plan’ is published by the Government later in 2013. Although PPS10 is principally
concerned with development of new waste facilities, it makes clear that the
overall objective of national policy on waste is to protect health and the
environment by producing less waste and using it as a resource as far as
possible. The identification of the Waste Management Area boundary on the
Proposals Map supports this approach.
2.264 The NPPF supports delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated
infrastructure (see paragraph 93 Objective10). The location of a Waste
Management Area that includes an ‘energy from waste’ incinerator (supporting a
district heating scheme) and a site suitable for processing recyclates is consistent
with this.
- 68 -
Core Strategy
2.265 Policy CS69 ‘Safeguarding Major Waste Facilities’ 104 identifies two locations for
major waste disposal facilities, one of which is the energy recovery plant at
Bernard Road. This is an established waste management facility.
Waste Management Strategy
2.266 The proposed policy area designation supports the approved Municipal Waste
Management Strategy (2009-2020) which includes the city’s kerbside collection
for recycling. This area identifies additional land that will be suitable for
processing additional recyclates and other operational uses that may be needed
to support this service. See also site allocation P00141Broadlands, at paragraph
3.244 .
Justification
2.267 The area has good access to the major road network and its near-central
location minimises the distance that collected waste needs to travel.
2.268 The proposed policy area designation supports policy F2 ‘Requirements for
Waste Management’ 105, which states that waste management will be promoted in
the designated Waste Management Areas. These areas need to be reflected on
the proposals Map.
Alternative Options
2.269 The area could have been shown as an Industrial Area as the area is surrounded
by industrial uses, and this would be a suitable use for the area. However, this
would mean that industrial uses would be preferred and dominant and the area is
already partially in use for waste disposal and vehicle storage in connection with
waste disposal.
Sustainability Issues
2.270 The Sustainability Appraisal carried out for the site in this area indicates mostly
positive indicators for this land use. The site is very close to the Parkway which
would provide good road access for waste management uses. It is also located
close to other waste transfer uses and therefore co-location opportunities may
arise. It is close to Supertram and high frequency bus routes for employees.
Waste management uses may appear unsightly, so some attention to screening
where appropriate would be needed.
104
105
Core Strategy, page 124
City Policies and Sites, page 66
- 69 -
Equality Issues
2.271 The Equality Appraisal shows that the site offers some opportunity for
employment uses that contribute to the city economy. It is a highly accessible site
benefiting from very close proximity to the Supertram route, and good access to
high frequency bus routes. It could offer job opportunities in an area of low
income and high unemployment to areas that are very close to the site at Darnall,
Manor, and Wybourn.
Consultee Preferences
2.272 There are no consultee comments that refer specifically to this policy area.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.273 Implementation of the policy area would be primarily by the Development
Management process, supporting the growth of existing waste management uses
within its boundary, and using policy F2 to specifically support new waste
management proposals. A site allocation has been identified to deliver this land
use. This site is uniquely located to deliver opportunities to expand the city’s
waste management capacity, see site allocation P00141 Broadlands.
Flexibility and Risk
2.274 The incinerator at Bernard Road exists, and there is no evidence to suggest that
this will not continue to operate through the plan period. There is a risk that the
areas of supporting land at Lumley Street (primarily depots for the waste
contractor, and land available for expansion of waste management uses,
including site P00141), may not be needed or requirements may change.
However, the implementation plan that supports the Municipal Waste
Management Strategy (paragraph 2.266) should indicate future land needs. In
the meantime, the area can be kept under review, and should circumstances
change, this area might be reconsidered as a logical longer-term extension to the
surrounding Industrial Area, where waste management uses would still be
acceptable.
Monitoring
2.275 The mix and dominance of uses within the Waste Management Policy Area will
be reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is
provided in the Global Environment and natural Resources Background Report.
- 70 -
Conclusions on Souindness of Waste Management Policy Area
2.276 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.277 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed infrastructure requirements set out in the
Municipal Waste Management Strategy in a sustainable and accessible
location (paragraph 2.266).
2.278 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy
specifically policy CS69 ‘Safeguarding Major Waste Facilities’, and City
Policy F2 ’Requirements for Waste Management’, (paragraphs 2.265 and
2.268.
•
It is the most appropriate given that the locations are already identified in
the Core Strategy and used for waste management.
•
This area already includes an ‘energy from waste’ incinerator and a site
suitable for processing waste for recycling, (paragraph 2.273).
2.279 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as the incinerator is operational and
there is already related waste management and depot uses here, and they
are expected to continue (paragraph 2.274).
2.280 It is consistent with national policy:
•
It will contribute to the national policy objectives for waste, including to
produce less waste and to use it as a resource as far as possible,
(Sustainable Waste Management’ PPS10).
•
It will support delivery of renewable and low carbon energy by promoting
an area to deliver associated infrastructure to support the Council’s Waste
Management Service (NPPF Objective 10).
Open Space Policy Area
2.281 A variety of Open Space Areas exist within the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy
Area. They are generally consistent with those currently shown on the UDP
Proposals Map. They range from the District Park at High Hazels Park to
smaller local parks such as Phillimore Park, Darnall Community Park (Kashmir
- 71 -
Gardens) and Tinsley Green in Tinsley. They include the recreation ground at
Mather Road in Darnall, and the sports grounds at Bawtry Road and Ferrars
Road in Tinsley. They also include the Blackburn Meadows Nature Reserve at
the very north end of the area. Informal Open Space Areas are shown alongside
the canal and River Don in the valley bottom, and alongside the M1 Motorway at
Tinsley, as well as allotment sites at Ouse Road and Infield Lane in Darnall, and
cemeteries at Attercliffe, Darnall, and Tinsley Park.
2.282 An extension of Open Space Area alongside the canal and the river to the north
of Sheffield Road is shown on the Proposals Map to replace Fringe Industry and
Business Areas shown on the UDP.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
.
2.283 The areas of Open Space, shown on the Proposals Map, specifically support
NPPF Objective 8 ‘Promoting healthy communities’. Paragraph 73 spells out the
importance of access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and
recreation. Paragraph 74 protects existing open space where it is needed.
Core Strategy
2.284 Policy CS45 ’Quality and Accessibility of Open Space’ 106states that safeguarding
and improvement of open space will take priority over creation of new areas, so it
is important that areas, especially those that are above the 0.4 hectare threshold
and locally valued, such as the community parks, are identified on the Proposals
Map.
2.285 Core Strategy policy CS47 ’Safeguarding Open Space’ 107sets out the criteria to
consider whether open space is surplus, and supports the safeguarding of
existing open space. The policy only allows for development on open space
where equivalent or improved open space can be provided elsewhere; or the site
is surplus to its open space function; or if the development is ancillary to the open
space area.
Justification
2.286 Compared to other parts of the city, and due to its mainly industrial past, there is
relatively little green space within Attercliffe, Tinsley, and Darnall. It is important,
therefore, to retain, protect and enhance what does exist, and to have flexible
policy that can provide for creation of new space where it is needed and find
suitable new use for any that is proven as surplus.
106
107
Core Strategy, page 87
Core Strategy, page 89
- 72 -
2.287 The river and canal corridors are a key asset for the area providing both
recreation and wildlife value, and often in the past development has encroached
right up to the edge of the waterways offering little protection and opportunity for
access, whilst organisations such as the Five Weirs Walk Trust 108 and the River
Stewardship Company 109 are raising awareness of these routes and increasing
use for recreation. The Proposals Map showing these as Open Space Areas
reinforces their importance. The Open Space Areas also act as Green Links
across the valley connecting larger areas including the river and canal corridor
and are identified on the Proposals Map.
2.288 The following sites are designated Open Space because of their importance for
sport and recreation mainly for the surrounding residential area:
•
•
•
•
•
Tinsley Recreation Ground
Coleridge Road (football pitches)
Darnall Community Park
the linked open spaces around the Greenland Estate between Darnall
Cemetery and Phillimore Park
Mather Road Recreation Ground.
High Hazels Park is included within the Green Belt.
2.289 Some Open Space Areas have a wider importance, for example, some sports
grounds were originally established to support Sheffield’s steel industry workers,
and following on from this tradition are still in a sport use and serve a wider than
local area. In the Lower Don Valley these are located in Tinsley. They are the
Meadowhall Soccer Centre on St Lawrence Road, the former Outokumpu
Sports Ground (now Sheffield United training ground) and the Graham Solley
Sports Development Centre (run by Sheffield Hallam University), both located
at Bawtry Road, and the now disused former DC Cook Sports ground (see
alternative options below).
2.290 The Lower Don Valley also accommodates the Don Valley Bowl which is a
facility of city wide importance valued both for its importance as informal green
recreation and relaxation space away from its noisy urban surroundings, and for
major events such as firework displays, festivals, and music concerts.
2.291 Some areas are designated for their importance for wildlife or to support their
importance for ecology, these areas are at Blackburn Meadows Nature
Reserve, the canal banks by the Tinsley Viaduct, along the riverbank of the
River Don (including the ecology park close to Sanderson’s Weir), and canal
banks along the Sheffield and Tinsley canal.
108
109
www.fiveweirs.co.uk
www.the-rsc.co.uk
- 73 -
2.292 There are cemeteries at Tinsley, Darnall, and Tinsley Park, all shown as Open
Space Areas.
2.293 Other areas are designated Open Space Areas to provide a buffer between noisy
uses and the nearby residential area, such as areas alongside the Parkway and
the M1 motorway close to the Tinsley Primary schools. The area of former
railway sidings in Darnall (known as the Darnall Triangle) is an unused area
between railway lines, but performs a useful function to buffer the residential area
from the industrial area beyond.
2.294 The proposed extension to the Open Space Area by the canal at Sheffield Road
Tinsley allows for a larger green area to be developed alongside the river and
canal creating a better recreational area, preserving important ecological habitat
and linking with other river corridor habitats.
2.295 This additional area of proposed open space could also be made available for
flood prevention measures. It may be necessary to provide land for flood risk
compensation as a result of developing elsewhere locally within the flood plain.
An area between the River Don and the railway that is a difficult shape and would
be difficult to access has been identified as an area of potential compensation.
Alternative Options
2.296 The proposed policy area designations largely reflect the extent and boundaries
of existing local open spaces and recreation grounds within the Lower Don Valley
Core Strategy area.
2.297 The former sports ground at Bawtry Road could have been redesignated as a
Housing Area as suggested by some consultees (see paragraph 2.304). The
sports ground has not been used for over 5 years as a sports ground and the
landowners’ preference is that the site be redesignated as a Housing Area and
used to help meet the city’s need for housing land. The site was originally an
employee sports facility that went out of use some years ago when the company
was dissolved. This site failed to attract a new recreation user, which may be
because it has poor drainage and a large part of the pitch areas are flooded, or at
least waterlogged, for a significant part of the playing season. Over the
intervening years the site has become valued by local residents, and it is widely
used as an informal recreation area. The part of the site that is waterlogged has
also become valuable as a wetland area and is designated as an area of
importance for nature.
2.298 The site was included as a potential housing site as part of the Additional Sites
consultation, which would have meant a change to Housing Area and allocation
as a housing site.
2.299 The site is retained as Open Space for the following main reasons:
- 74 -
•
Assessment of the availability of open space in the vicinity of the site
against the criteria set out in Core Strategy policy CS47 shows that it is the
only useable informal open space available in the area 110, and the site is
valued as such. Comments made by local residents during the Additional
Sites consultation concur with this.
•
Part of the site is designated as a Local Nature Site on the Proposals Map
and this area should be protected from development that may cause harm
to the wetland area and to an area nearby that is of value for foraging
wildlife 111.
•
The south eastern tip of the site is within a Food Zone 2 (medium
probability).
•
The land ownership pattern 112 on this site may make delivery of the site for
a coordinated housing scheme (or indeed any other use) very difficult to
deliver, especially as some ‘plots’ and parts of some ‘plots’ are located
within sensitive areas described above that should be protected from
development.
Sustainability Issues
2.300 Open Space sites are generally in sustainable locations within housing areas or
within close walking distance of surrounding residential properties. They provide
opportunity for wildlife to thrive, and opportunity for recreation supporting
objectives for a healthy community. At Bawtry Road, the Open Space area
provides for informal recreation where users would otherwise have a
considerable distance to travel. Development here could have a negative impact
on the area of wildlife importance especially if measures were taken that may
affect the wetland character of the site.
Equality Issues
2.301 Open spaces and recreation opportunity distributed across the area within
walking distance for those living close by is of particular benefit to residents with
dependent children, those with poor access to private transport, young people ,
and those suffering ill-health. At Bawtry Road this site is particularly useful for
informal recreation for those living close by, particularly school children. It is
110
The site was assessed against the criteria set out in CS47, for a catchment area of 400m for informal
open space, and 1200m for formal open space within the Sheffield boundary. According to the
Rotherham UDP there is an area of ‘Urban Greenspace’ within the 400m boundary at Balk Lane adjacent
the BOC works, but this is enclosed and does not appear to be used or available at all for any kind of
recreation.
111
See ecology report at www.sheffield.gov.uk/survey-reports
112
The site was sold in 2004 to a landbanking company who subsequently sold on the land in ‘plots’.
According to Land Registry information the site has 63 different land owners.
- 75 -
unlikely that people would travel to make use of this site when there may be
suitable areas closer by.
Consultee Preferences
2.302 At the Preferred Options stage Outokumpu 113 objected to the designation of their
sports ground as Open Space and playing field. In their view the recreation
space is private, with limited accessibility to the wider community, and, in the
event of a future development proposal, improvements to sports pitch provision
could be sought elsewhere as compensation. This proposal is not accepted, as
the value of this site is identified in the Sheffield Playing Pitch Strategy 114 . The
site includes good quality playing pitches, in an area identified as having a
deficiency of pitches, and with otherwise generally very poor quality open space.
Since this consultation stage the site has changed owners who are actively using
it for sport. There are no exceptional circumstances that would justify the
reallocation of this site for residential or other development purposes.
2.303 At the Preferred Options stage the landowner objected to the Darnall Triangle 115
as open space and requested that it be shown as Housing Area as an extension
to nearby housing areas. In their view the area is low quality and small parts of it
could be improved as part of a wider development of the area for housing. This
was rejected, and the identification of the land as a Local Nature Site is supported
by evidence of its value for biodiversity, held by the City Ecology Unit 116. The
designation of this area as Open Space Area complements and protects this
value. The site performs a useful function as a buffer area between the Darnall
residential area and the Parkway industrial area beyond. The integration of this
land as Open Space into any development proposal for development of adjacent
site PO0181 Ouse Road would be welcomed and supported.
2.304 At the Draft Plan consultation stage and at Additional Options stage, agents
acting for landowners and some landowners of the Bawtry Road Sports Ground
objected to its designation as Open Space and playing field 117. As it is disused,
the owners consider the site surplus, needed, and suitable for residential
development. At the Additional Options stage there was also considerable
support for retention of this site as a local Open Space, the site is well used and
valued by nearby residents 118, see paragraph 2.297.
2.305 At the Preferred Options stage, Draft stage, and landowner consultation, the
landowners at Vantage Riverside 119 commented that, in their view, the ‘Peninsula
113
Preferred options comment ID’s 1203 and 1204
Sheffield City Council - Playing Pitch Strategy
115
Preferred options comment ID 2302
116
www.sheffield.gov.uk/ecology-service/biological-records-centre
117
Draft Stage comment ID’s 50,51,53, Additional Options sample (includes summary of all issues
raised) comment ID 545
118
Additional Options, sample comment ID 269 (includes a summary of all issues raised)
119
Preferred Options comment ID 1118 and 1119, Draft Plan comment ID 176
114
- 76 -
Site' and land on the north bank of the river is a brownfield site which should be
designated as employment land consistent with policy CS5‘Locations for
Manufacturing, Warehousing/Distribution and Other Non Office Businesses’ 120
instead of Open Space Area. Identified ecological considerations could be
protected and incorporated within development proposals. This is rejected, the
importance of the site for ecology has been recorded by the City Ecology Unit
(see footnote 115 above), development here could have a negative impact on
valuable wildlife here and the area is more appropriately protected by designation
as Open Space Area.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.306 Implementation of change within the policy area would be primarily by the
Development Management process using polices CS47 ’Safeguarding of Open
Space’, CS73 ‘The Strategic Green Network’ 121 , and G1 ’Safeguarding and
Enhancing Biodiversity and Features of Geological Importance’ 122 where
appropriate. It is expected that the Open Space areas will change and adapt
over time in line with their local value and use. Green space projects in some
local areas, such as the Darnall Green Spaces Project’ 123, has contributed to the
regeneration of some of these areas. Local ‘Friends’ groups, such as ‘Friends of
Darnall Neighbourhood Park’, together with local action days with Council
support, help to promote the open space functions, and the importance of local
parks and open spaces, and encourage increased use from the local area 124.
Flexibility and Risk
2.307 There is a risk, especially in the current economic climate that maintenance of
recreation space may be reduced or withdrawn, and as a result an open space
becomes less attractive and more run down. There is also a risk that areas of
importance for wildlife may become despoiled or damaged and funding for
protecting these areas may be restricted. This is partly dealt with by actively
encouraging communities to be involved in the care and protection of their local
areas, see paragraph 2.306 above. However, CS47 specifically deals with
safeguarding open space and contains specific criteria to determine whether an
open space is truly redundant. Development proposals involving the loss of
identified open space will be assessed against the provisions of this policy.
120
Core Strategy, page 38
Core Strategy, page 130
122
City Policies and Sites, page 71
123
Sheffield City Council - Green Spaces Projects
124
www.sheffield.gov.uk/ parks-woodlands/gettinginvolved
121
- 77 -
Monitoring
2.308 Open Space Assessments, carried out as part of the Development Management
process, will identify where development may affect provision of Open Space in a
local area. The extent and value of Open Space Policy Areas will be reassessed
as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is provided in the
Opportunities and Well-being Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Open Space Policy Area
2.309 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.310 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed infrastructure requirements to provide areas
of Open Space to meet the recreation needs of people living or working in
the area.
•
It supports the continuation of existing and locally valued areas for their
recreation and/or wildlife value.
2.311 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives for safeguarding open space
already in the Core Strategy specifically policy CS47 ’Safeguarding Open
Spaces’, see paragraph 2.285.
•
It is the most appropriate given that generally these areas already exist and
are identified for protection, (paragraphs from 2.286).
2.312 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as these are existing Open Space
areas and they are expected to continue.
2.313 It is consistent with national policy:
•
It identifies areas of Open Space to be safeguarded from development
consistent with NPPF Objective 8 ‘Promoting healthy communities’. This
sets out the importance of access to high quality open spaces and
opportunities for sport and recreation (paragraph 73). Paragraph 74
protects existing open space where it is needed.
- 78 -
Countryside Areas: Green Belt Policy Area
2.314 There is one area of Green Belt in the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy Area, to
the south and east of the former Sheffield City Airport at Tinsley. This area
includes the Tinsley Park Golf Course and High Hazels Park.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
2.315 Objective 9 ‘Protecting Green Belt land’ sets out the continued importance of the
Green Belt and sets out the reasons for including land within it.
2.316 The areas defined as Green Belt in the Lower Don Valley serve the purposes of
including land set out at paragraph 80, especially those parts of the area which lie
on the Sheffield/ Rotherham boundary and serve the purpose of keeping the two
settlements distinct.
2.317 Paragraph 83 indicates the permanence of the Green Belt boundary and any
changes should normally be through the preparation or review of the Local Plan.
2.318 The Green Belt policy areas also specifically support the fifth NPPF Core
Principle which states that planning should ‘take account of the different roles and
character of different areas’ 125.
Core Strategy
2.319 CS71 ‘Protecting the Green Belt’ 126 states that countryside and other open land
around the existing built-up areas of the city will be safeguarded by maintaining
the Green Belt, which will not be subject to strategic or local review. It also
identifies exceptional circumstances, where the boundary may be reviewed to
remove untenable anomalies. The areas of Green Belt in this area are
safeguarded, with one exception,
2.320 The supporting text to policy CS71, states that the only non-minor change will be
at the airport runway. This will be resolved by a land swap which will address a,
major anomaly by removing land that does not serve a Green Belt purpose, and
add land to the Green Belt which strengthens the Green Belt function in this
location, and compensates for the area that is removed.
Justification
2.321 Land on the current airport runway (now known as Sheffield Business Park phase
2) will be taken from the Green Belt and designated as a Business and Industrial
125
126
NPPF, page 5
Core Strategy, page 127
- 79 -
Area consistent with the surrounding area and sites, and a larger area to the
south of the former airport is added into the Green Belt. The terminal building at
the airport and part of the runway, previously straddled the boundary between a
Fringe Industry and Business Area and Green Belt (see UDP Proposals Map).
The anomaly was created by the obliteration of the Green Belt boundary on the
ground through the construction of the airport runway. The amendment to the
boundary represents the minimum deletion of land from the Green Belt necessary
to secure a boundary that can be identified on the ground (in accordance with the
NPPF, paragraph 85).
2.322 The area to the south of the runway known as Tinsley Park Hill is green and open
in character and was shown as an Open Space Area in the UDP. It is a valued
Open Space area, an area of former open cast mining spoil that, with sensitive
landscaping and management, now blends into the surrounding Green Belt area
and has become a Local Nature Reserve. It is much used as a vantage point for
viewing the surrounding landscape. Although it could be retained and protected
as Open Space its location adjacent to the Green Belt at Tinsley Park Golf
Course serves an important function in helping to separate the urban areas of
Sheffield and Rotherham. Adding it to the Green Belt will form a stronger wedge
into the urban area and permanently prevent it from expanding outwards. The
changes result in around 6ha being removed from the Green Belt and 40ha
added to the Green Belt, resulting in a net increase in Green Belt Area.
Alternative Options
2.323 As the principle of the land swap at the airport runway had already been
established by the Core Strategy, the only options relate to the precise location of
the new boundary. Representations were made by the landowners on the
detailed location at the Preferred Options stage (see paragraph 2.327) who,
whilst stating support for the change, considered it did not go far enough and
should include the whole of the former airport boundary.
2.324 Land formerly shown as Green Belt around the operational areas of the former
airport at Europa Link has been designated as Business and Industrial Area to
reflect airport operational activities that existed at the time of the comment. The
Green Belt boundary has been redrawn tightly around the developed (i.e. hard
surfaced) operational areas of the former airport at its eastern end in order to
remove the minimum of land. The areas retained as Green Belt are the outlying
areas of the airport surrounding the runway for safety reasons. They are green
and open in character and play an important part in maintaining the separation
between the built-up areas of Sheffield and Rotherham.
Sustainability Issues
2.325 The removal of the anomaly at the former Sheffield Airport has no sustainability
implications.
- 80 -
Equality Issues
2.326 No equality issues arise from the change to the boundary at the former Sheffield
Airport.
Consultee Preferences
2.327 Comments made at Preferred Options and Draft Stages supported the revision of
the boundary 127. Other comments 128 supported the change but considered it did
not go far enough (see paragraph 2.321 above).
2.328 Rotherham Borough Council expressed a preference to maintain the general
extent of their Green Belt on the Sheffield /Rotherham boundary around Tinsley
in their draft Core Strategy 129. Although one of the main proposals includes
promotion of two broad areas for growth and extensions into the Green Belt from
the larger towns and local centres specifically to meet the needs of those
communities, at present there is no indication that any changes to the boundary
will be proposed on the Sheffield/Rotherham boundary.
Effectiveness
Delivery
2.329 Implementation of the policy area would be by confirmation of a new Green Belt
boundary in this location, protected by the Development Management process.
Further information on Green Belt policy areas is provided in the Character and
Heritage Background Report.
Flexibility and Risk
2.330 There are no issues of flexibility and risk with the Green Belt designation here.
Flexibility is intentionally not built in to this policy area as this would pre-empt any
future comprehensive Green Belt review and is contrary to Core Strategy policy
CS71.
Monitoring
2.331 There are no formal points for monitoring this policy area.
127
Preferred Options CPRE ID 2007, Draft ID 120
Preferred Options GVA Grimley ID 2308, 2309, 2312, and 2511
129
Rotherham Local Plan Core Strategy Focused Changes January 2013, Policy CS4.RMBC Local Plan
Core Strategy focused changes consultation
128
- 81 -
Conclusions on Soundness of Green Belt Policy Area
2.332 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
2.333 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed reasons for inclusion of land within the Green
Belt and confirms its permanence.
2.334 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives for safeguarding land in the
Green Belt already in the Core Strategy specifically policy CS71
’Protecting the Green Belt’ , (paragraph 2.319).
•
It is the most appropriate given that generally there areas already exist and
are confirmed for protection, and it addresses an untenable anomaly at the
former Sheffield Airport (paragraph 2.321).
2.335 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period because these areas already exist and
are performing a Green Belt function and they are expected to continue as
such.
2.336 It is consistent with national policy:
• The areas defined as Green Belt are consistent with the purposes of
including land, especially those parts of the area which lie on the Sheffield/
Rotherham boundary and help to keep the two settlements distinct, (NPPF
paragraph 80).
• The change proposed at Tinsley Park is consistent with the criteria for
exceptional circumstances that would justify a change in boundary, (NPPF
paragraph 85).
- 82 -
3
LOWER DON VALLEY ALLOCATED SITES
Introduction
3.1
Most of the sites proposed for allocation in the City Policies and Sites document
are safeguarded for one, or sometimes more than one, required use. A few sites
are allocated where uses would be determined through the policy area
framework. In these cases flexibility is considered more desirable than certainty
about a required use. The general reasoning for this is briefly summarised in the
City Policies and Sites document. This chapter provides further background on
individual sites.
3.2
All allocations are subject to the provisions of citywide policies and criteria set out
in the Core Strategy and City Policies documents, see Policy J1 and paragraph
12.12 in the City Policies and Sites document. This document refers to the
evidence that is distinctive to the site or its area.
3.3
The site allocations in the Lower Don Valley are all consistent with locational
requirements set out in the Core Strategy spatial policies for the different parts of
the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy Area in which they are situated. See Chapter
1 paragraph 1.23. Allocated sites are listed in the same order as in the City
Policies and Sites document.
3.4
Some sites in the Lower Don Valley will have conditions placed on their
development to ensure they are compliant with specific environmental policies in
the Core Strategy and other studies. For the Lower Don Valley these include:
Core Strategy Policies
3.5
130
131
CS59 ‘New Roads’ 130 sets out where new roads will be needed to support the
Core Strategy’s economic objectives and address local environmental problems,
it specifically refers to the M1 Junction 34 relief road (Halfpenny Link, now known
as Tinsley Link). For some sites there is a requirement for this route to be in
place or contractually committed before development that would add significant
traffic is brought forward 131. As Junction 34south and the surrounding highway
network is at its capacity at peak times the new road is needed to create
additional highway capacity for all vehicles and reduce pressure on this
congested junction by providing a by-pass route for traffic that does not need to
access J34south. The new road is also needed to enable development sites to
come forward that may otherwise be constrained by existing highways capacity.
See also paragraph 3.321 (Tinsley Link) for further detail and delivery.
Core Strategy, page 106
Sites P00127, see paragraph 3.43, P00138, see paragraph 3.87, P00182 see paragraph 3.128
- 83 -
3.6
For some of the proposed site allocations, particularly those located close to the
River Don or to the canal, policy CS67 ‘Flood Risk Management’ 132 will be a
relevant consideration. National policy (NPPF paragraph 100) requires that sites
with a lower probability of flooding are preferred to those with a higher risk. For
some sites in the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy Area, exceptions to this may
be necessary. These sites, although they may be within an identified flood risk
area, are proposed for allocation because they lie within a key regeneration area,
and sufficient alternative sites are not available in other locations in the city to
wholly meet the provisions of policy CS1’ Land for Employment and Economic
Development’. This means relying on mitigation measures in some cases to
ensure site delivery. Policy CS67 sets out the criteria for flood risk management.
Other Studies
Sheffield Employment Sites Survey and Sheffield Employment Land Review
(ELR)
3.7
This study 133 carried out a detailed analysis of employment sites across the city,
and scored them as employment sites against a matrix utilising the following
criteria: policy considerations, sustainability, access, site quality and site
constraints, and market requirements and perceptions.
3.8
The study recommended that the best sites (those with overall suitability scores
in excess of 80%) need to be protected by policy, the middle scoring sites (those
with overall suitability scores in excess of 60% and less than 80%) should also be
protected but they may need constraints removing to enable them to come
forward, and the least suitable sites could be considered for alternative land uses.
3.9
Sites in the Lower Don Valley that had been included within this study with scores
above 80% have generally been proposed for allocation.
3.10
In March 2013 a further piece of work, the Sheffield Employment Land Review,
was produced to demonstrate the need for, and deliverability of employment
allocations across the City 134. The report provides an analysis of a selection of
identified existing employment sites; and for this background report it serves to
update generally on suitability and deliverability of a selection of the site
allocations that are set out in this chapter. An assessment was made of each
site’s suitability for employment use against an agreed list of criteria reflecting the
CLG Guidance on Employment Land Review, and Sheffield’s own specific local
circumstances. For all the sites included in Chapter 3 that were included in this
updated study the allocation type is supported.
132
Core Strategy, page 120
For SCC by Atkins in 2007 and updated by Lambert Smith Hampton in 2009. See: Sheffield
134
For SCC by Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners, March 2013
133
- 84 -
Land Use Transport Integration Study (LUTI)
3.11
South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) carried out a LUTI
analysis for Sheffield sites. In this study the site allocations were tested against
the Core Public Transport Network as defined within the Second South Yorkshire
Local Transport Plan (LTP2). This includes medium and high frequency bus
corridors (defined as 6+ buses per hour), the Supertram Network and the Railway
Network. The Core Public Transport Network (CPTN) has been used as this
provides what is deemed to be an attractive public transport service and therefore
focuses development in the areas where we can best utilise existing resources.
3.12
Sites are scored red, amber or green according to their proximity to the CPTN
from a centre point on the site. Red sites are those which do not fall within the
buffer of the CPTN. This means that this site has limited access to public
transport as it is outside of the specified walking catchment area. Amber sites
are sites that are outside a 333m buffer area for the CPTN but within a 400m
buffer. Amber sites reflect the need that transport interventions need to be
considered as the site has a degree of restriction to public transport use. Green
sites are the land allocations that fall completely within the CPTN buffer. In
general, these allocations require minimal (if any) public transport intervention.
3.13
The red, amber, green score system provides additional justification for the
allocation of employment sites in this background report. Housing sites are
tested against policy C1 ‘Access to Local Services and Community Facilities in
New Residential Developments’ 135.
Sheffield Infrastructure and Water Study, March 2010
3.14
This is a study undertaken for Creative Sheffield and Sheffield City Council by
WYG Engineering to understand the existing energy, water and
telecommunications infrastructure within Sheffield and the ability to accommodate
future population and economic growth as envisaged in the Sheffield Economic
Masterplan and Sheffield Local Plan 136. The study aims to identify the utilities
constraints and investment requirements which might ultimately constrain
economic growth and sustainable development in the city.
3.15
It is used in this background report to highlight potential delivery constraints for
site allocations. These will need to be the subject of further investigation by the
site developer.
135
136
City Policies and Sites, page 33
Sheffield City Council - Background Reports 2010 Energy and water study
- 85 -
Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA), July 2008
3.16
Sheffield’s current Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) 137 was completed in
July 2008. It considers the probability of fluvial flooding, based upon existing
available information provided by the Environment Agency. It collates all known
sources of flooding in the city, and all areas subject to flooding up to (and
including) once in every 20 years on average have been delineated as areas that
have ‘low’, ‘medium’, or ‘high’ probability of flooding. These are shown on a series
of maps covering the city.
3.17
Developers will be encouraged to demonstrate that their proposal will deliver a
positive reduction in flood risk to Sheffield, whether that be by reducing the
frequency or severity of flooding (for example, through the introduction of
Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS), or by mitigating the flood risk and
designing the development to be resilient to the flood risk. As part of a planning
application a detailed flood risk assessment should demonstrate how this
reduction in flood risk will be delivered.
3.18
Whist this chapter aims to bring together evidence from a variety of available
sources it does not go into depth and should not be quoted as a primary source in
support for planning applications.
Allocation Type – Business and Industrial Sites
Sites with Required Uses
3.19
These sites are allocated for required uses, Research and development (B1b), or
light industry (B1c), or general industry (B2 or other, unclassified industrial/
processing uses), or warehouses/ storage (B8), and they are all located within
Business and Industry Areas on the proposals Map, see also Chapter 2
paragraph 2.39. Development should be in accordance with the provisions of
City Policy J1 (a). There are 3 sites within this category.
•
•
•
P00136 Rear of Davy Markham Ltd, Prince of Wales Road, Darnall
P00143 Calor Site, Shepcote Lane
P00472 Broomco, Europa Link
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.20
137
These three sites are all located within a Business and Industry Area; see
Chapter 1 paragraphs 2.40 - 2.46 which detail how the policy area is consistent
with national policy and the Core Strategy.
www.sheffield.gov.uk/strategic-flood-risk-assessment
- 86 -
Justification
Alternative Options
3.21
See Chapter 2 paragraphs 2.48 which refer to choices for the Business &
Industry Policy Area.
3.22
All three sites are particularly suitable for business or industrial uses because
they are part of a larger existing employment area in established and designated
Business and Industry areas; P00136 Rear of Davy Markham and P00143
Calor Site, are in Darnall on the north eastern side of Greenland Road, and
P00472 Europa Link is at Tinsley Park, south of Europa Link. No alternative
land uses options have been proposed for these sites.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.23
These three sites are allocated for business or industrial uses because:
3.24
P00136 Rear of Davy Markham Ltd
•
It could accommodate manufacturing, or distribution and warehousing type
uses on a wider site already used for this purpose.
•
A suitable boundary of trees already exists between the site and housing on
Handsworth Crescent beyond the site to protect existing residents from any
nuisance.
•
The site is well placed to meet the location requirements of policy CS5’
Locations for Manufacturing, Distribution/Warehousing and other Non-office
Businesses’. The site is located on the A6102 (Greenland Road) with easy
access to the M1 motorway via A631 (Shepcote Lane) to Junction 34south.
•
The site is located approximately 500 metres from the Darnall District Centre
with a range of shops and services, including banks, to serve employees at
the site.
•
It can provide employment opportunities reasonably close to residential
areas and to transport connections in the neighbouring Darnall and
Handsworth areas, parts of which suffer from relatively high unemployment.
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey identifies the site as suitable for
general industrial/business and incubator/SME cluster and
research/technology/science. The survey gives the site a suitability score of
78.8. Sites that achieved an overall suitability score between 60-80% are
considered to be suitable for future employment use; this supports the
allocation of the site for the required use.
- 87 -
3.25
3.26
138
P00143 Calor Site, Shepcote Lane:
•
The site has a prominent location on the Shepcote Lane road frontage which
is a main road leading up to the M1Junction 34south.
•
The nearest sensitive neighbour (housing) is located around 200m away
across a major road.
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey identifies the site suitable for office,
warehouse/distribution; general industrial/business; and incubator/SME
cluster uses. The survey allocates the site a suitability score of 85.2, or
highly suitable for employment use.
•
The site is well placed to meet the location requirements of policy CS5 It is
close to the A6102 (Greenland Road) with easy access to the M1 motorway
via A631 (Shepcote Lane) to Junction 34south, and the site is within
reasonably close walking distance to neighbouring communities in Darnall,
parts of which suffer from relatively high unemployment.
P00472 Broomco, Europa Link
•
The site is well placed to meet the location requirements of policy CS5 and
CS8 ‘Tinsley Park’ for business and industry uses. The site is located close
to the Europa Link with easy access to the M1 motorway via Shepcote Lane
(A631) to Junction 34south.
•
The site is located within an area specifically promoted by Sheffield
Business Parks Ltd 138 as a high quality out of city centre location for
businesses. The site has a prominent location on the Europa Link frontage
to the Sheffield Business Park, this and its association with the business
park will make it an attractive site to the market.
•
It can provide employment opportunities, and benefit from proximity of other
business park occupants.
•
Core Strategy policy CS3 ‘Locations for Office Development’ specifically
supports this location south of Europa Link as an alternative location for
those businesses which require convenient access to the motorway
network.
•
The site is capable of providing employment uses close to areas of relatively
high unemployment in both Darnall and Tinsley which are the nearest
residential areas to the site.
http://www.sheffieldbusinesspark.co.uk
- 88 -
3.27
For each site other justification, there are issues to be resolved before sites can
come forward and these include :
Accessibility
P00136 r/o Davy
Markham Ltd
P00143 Calor Site,
Shepcote Lane
P00472 Europa Link
•
For P00136 the nearest high frequency bus route
(number 52) is approximately 500m walk away,
and the SYPTE Land Use Integration Study scores
this site as amber. This means it is outside the
walking catchment area for bus routes used in the
study. For Amber sites transport interventions may
be needed to address this. However the site does
benefit from less frequent bus services (routes 1,
4, 6 and 7) which operate via Prince of Wales
Road.
• For P00143 the SYPTE Land Use Integration
Study scores this site as red. This means the site
has limited access to public transport for
employees travelling from further afield. A half
hourly route (A1) directly serves the site, and a
number of other less frequent bus services (routes
1,7 and 28) operate via Greenland Road with bus
stops within 200m of the site.
• P00472 does not benefit from access to high
frequency public transport. The site is within 200m
of a bus stop on the A1 bus route which has a 30
minute frequency.
• For all three sites a travel plan that sets out all
transport options and indicates how public
transport deficiencies can be addressed would
support development at this site; this would be
consistent with CS53 ’Management of Demand for
Travel’ 139and E1’Development and Trip
Generation’ 140. These sites would benefit from the
actions set out in the Public Transport Action Plan
see paragraph 1.67.
Infrastructure
P00136 r/o Davy
Markham Ltd
139
140
• The Sheffield Energy and Water Study highlighted
Core Strategy, page 98
City policies and Sites, page 51
- 89 -
an infrastructure constraint for this site that will
need to be addressed before this site is delivered.
Yorkshire Water have identified that a section of
450mm combined sewer is recorded as crossing
the site. A stand-off distance of 3 metres is
required at each side of the sewer. This
requirement may reduce the developable area of
the site as a diversion route is considered unlikely
to be practical. It is recommended that the sewer
easement is worked into any development proposal
to optimise developable site area.
Justification for Conditions
3.28
These site allocations also have conditions required to address specific needs
as follows:
Access
P00136 r/o Davy
Markham Ltd
P00143 Calor Site,
Shepcote Lane
Independent access to the site may be needed, this is
included because this site is situated at the rear of a
larger site and it is only accessed from Prince of Wales
Road through the main part of the site. This may be an
issue for some users, but is not essential to deliver
development.
There are no conditions attached to this site allocation.
Transport measures
P00472 Europa
Link
As this site is located close to J34south of the M1,
development could generate trips that will add to
existing congestion. As part of development proposals,
an assessment should consider whether measures are
necessary to mitigate impact of traffic generated by
this development to ensure the continued operation of
the strategic road network. This is likely to be best
achieved by effective use of a travel plan, see
paragraph 3.26 above.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.29
The sustainability appraisal recorded generally positive impacts for employment
uses at all of these sites.
- 90 -
3.30
Negative impacts are recorded due to relatively poor access by high frequency
public transport that may result in additional car journeys or reduce employment
opportunities for those without access to a car.
3.31
The main equality impact around is access to public transport for those without
private transport and this may affect certain groups, especially Black Minority
Ethnic groups within the Lower Don Valley. Mitigation measures could explore
public transport improvements to this site to encourage users to use public
transport as part of a travel plan and improve connectivity to facilities for
employees, for example, improved pedestrian routes towards Shepcote Lane to
bus stops for alternative bus routes for site P00143 Calor Site, and continued
promotion of car sharing by the Business Park for site P00472 Europa Link.
Also see paragraph 3.27 where this is raised as an issue to be resolved before
these sites are delivered.
Consultee Preferences
3.32
For all three sites landowners commented that the policy designation and
allocation of their site is in line with their aims for the site 141, no other comments
have been recorded.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
3.33
These three sites are in private ownership and it is expected that they will be
brought forward or promoted by the landowners for development. For all
employment sites, at the present time, there is a risk that landowners may delay
development of their land until there is a more favourable market for development
and investment. In all cases no specific proposals have been identified for
industrial development that can be detailed in this document, but there are no
irresolvable issues that would prevent any of these sites coming forward during
the plan period.
3.34
Whilst these sites are allocated for Business or Industrial uses, and the reasoning
is given above in paragraphs 3.22- 3.25, and the land is safeguarded to meet
employment needs; some flexibility is built in by policy J1 which would allow up to
20% of the sites to come forward for other uses (as determined acceptable within
the Industrial Area) especially if they would complement or help to bring forward a
development proposal.
3.35
P00472 Europa Link is within the Sheffield City Region Enterprise Zone (EZ) and
the City Council has produced a Local Development Order (LDO) that includes
this site. The LDO promotes uses that help to deliver the EZ aims which are
advanced manufacturing and related technology together with other uses that
141
Landowner consultation December 2009
- 91 -
support these industries, see paragraph 1.50 and 1.51. Development that meets
the requirements of the LDO at this site could be developed without the need for
a planning application.
3.36
Site P00136 r/o Davy Markham Ltd would have to be well marketed, as it is not
a very visible site from the main road and has to be accessed via the front part of
the site, there is a risk of it being overlooked in favour of more prominent sites.
Whilst P00143 Calor Site should be attractive to the market, it is a highly visible
site on a main route to the motorway.
Monitoring
3.37
There is no formal monitoring of employment sites planned, however updating of
a sites database will monitor gains and losses of sites.
Allocation Type – Business and Industrial Sites
Sites without Required Uses
3.38
These sites are allocated without required land uses. Allocation means that their
status as development sites is taken into account in infrastructure providers
plans, but the flexibility for preferred land uses set out in the menu for the
underlying policy area will apply, see City Policies and Sites Document paragraph
12.6. The type of development allowed on these sites is set out by table H1 in
the City Policies and Sites document.
3.39
Two of these sites are located within policy areas that do not require specific land
uses to dominate, in this case Business Area (P00127 River Don District) and a
General Employment Area (P00129 Alsing Road). These two sites are
documented separately as there is complex history and reasoning for these
allocations.
3.40
P00127 comprises several plots of vacant and cleared former industrial land
around Meadowhall Way and Weedon Street. To the north of the site across
Meadowhall Way is the Meadowhall Centre. The site was previously considered
as four separate sites 142 but to promote and assist delivery of comprehensive
regeneration of this area, the sites are now shown as a single site. The site has
more recently become known as the River Don District.
3.41
P00129 comprises land to the north of the Meadowhall Centre. The site lies on
either side of Alsing Road. The south part of the site is presently used as a
coach and overspill car park for the shopping centre.
142
Formerly sites P00127, P00157, P00158, P00171
- 92 -
3.42
The remainder of the Business or Industry sites without required uses are located
within Business and Industry Policy Areas, see paragraph 2.39. The justification
for the need for flexibility is set out in the listing, and delivery should be in
accordance with the provisions of Policy J1 (b). There are 5 sites within this
category, see from paragraph 3.87.
P00127 River Don District (Business Area)
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.43
As the site is located within a Business Area, see Chapter 2 paragraphs 2.2 to
2.10, which detail how the policy area is consistent with National Policy and the
Core Strategy.
3.44
The site is within an area covered by the Lower Don Valley Masterplan (2005),
(see paragraph 1.40), and the River Don District Masterplan (2007). The
second masterplan was written by the landowner to aid the development of
proposals for the site and evolved into an outline planning application, approved
in 2008, for a mixed-use development including mainly business and residential
uses 143.
3.45
Both these masterplans aim to attract nationally mobile businesses and uses that
need large sites not typically available in the City Centre, and create a new mixed
use community of employment and housing.
3.46
The Lower Don Valley Masterplan and Vision identifies business as a major
component of new land uses here. It states that over time the balance of
employment types should evolve to include more office and service related
opportunities. It refers to a high quality business park in this location.
Justification
Alternative Options
3.47
The detail of the masterplans described above informed the thinking on options
for the Business Area, and in turn for this site allocation, also see paragraph 2.11.
3.48
The masterplan splits the site into plots 1-5 and indicates 'character areas 'and
provides indicative land uses. The indicative proposals for this site include mixed
use with a considerable component of high quality workspace 144 . The uses likely
to be proposed at this site are offices, housing, and other uses that would support
a new community; this could include hotel, small scale retail, open space, and
some leisure uses. The outline planning consent follows the recommendations of
143
08/02595/OUT approved (subject to legal agreement 15/12/08)
144
River District Masterplan 2007, page 50
- 93 -
the masterplan, and provides an indication of the landowners preferred intentions
for this site. It also sets out how site constraints are to be dealt with (see
paragraph 3.51). Due to its complexity, the permission will be valid until May
2019.
3.49
According to CS7 ’Meadowhall’, in the Meadowhall area the predominant land
use would be for employment, including office development and non office
business around the Meadowhall Centre, but also to include for some housing
development in the area where environmental conditions are acceptable, which
lends itself to an allocation that allows for a mixture of uses.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.50
The option to allocate this site for Business Area uses would be supported by the
following considerations.
• It would make the site designation consistent with the extant planning consent
which has a longer than normal lifespan.
• The site would help to complement the employment offer of the City Centre in
an accessible location.
• The site could provide office space at a lower density than the City Centre,
which may be more attractive to some business users, and it could offer a
campus style format that would be a distinctly different offer to the City Centre.
• For housing use, the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment 145
identifies this site as a Brownfield site that has capacity to deliver 800 dwellings
over a period 2016/7 to 2026, with most of this site for longer term housing
delivery (post 2020). The site is within the former Housing Market Renewal
area but does not form part of a priority area for delivery of housing
regeneration. Transform South Yorkshire had commented that the overall
regeneration strategy of the housing renewal areas could be undermined by
development in a relatively isolated location away from existing communities.
The level of required infrastructure work, and current market conditions
indicate that the expected delivery indicated in the SHLAA would be
appropriate for this site.
• The planning consent for the site indicates that some apartments and serviced
apartments could be delivered on this site, which provides a different type of
housing offer to that being provided in the wider former housing market
renewal areas. It has potential to add to the range and types of housing
145
Sheffield and Rotherham Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, report for Sheffield, March
2010 update, Appendix 6. Sites S00767, S00770, S00771. It did not include the Meadowhall Way site
(ex P00171)
- 94 -
available in the area which was one of the objectives of this regeneration
programme.
• The site is consistent with policy C1 ‘Access to Local Services and Community
Facilities in New Residential Developments’ 146 , it has access to public
transport, and a range of local services and community facilities within a
walkable distance.
• The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey deals with the sites separately in
accordance with site boundaries at the Preferred Options stage (see paragraph
3.7). It generally identifies the whole site area as suitable for a wide range of
employment uses, and scores all sites above 80.0. This supports the general
approach for employment uses being part of the mix of uses envisaged for this
site.
• This site was also included within the selection of sites for the Employment
Land Review. The conclusion for this site was that it would not be reasonable
to expect such a large site area to come forward solely for employment uses.
This site would be appropriate for employment led development with some
high value uses included to help bring the site forward. This is consistent with
the flexible allocation for this site 147
• The site is well served by public transport, including the Transport Interchange
and Carbrook tram stop. The site is located close to the A6109 (Meadowhall
Road) with easy access to the M1 motorway via Junction 34south, and from
the eastern end of the site via A6178 (Sheffield Road). The SYPTE Land Use
Integration Study scores this site as green, public transport intervention would
not be needed to bring this site forward, which supports the identification of this
site for some employment uses.
3.51
There are a number of identified issues to address before delivery of this site for
the envisaged new development. The planning consent specifies a wide range of
measures to be provided in order to deliver infrastructure and services to support
proposed development, and identifies measures needed to overcome identified
constraints. The site allocation picks out the key issues and sets them out as
conditions on development, see paragraphs 3.52 onwards Other issues include:
• Potential constraints on the use of this site for housing arising from poor air
quality due to emissions from local roads and rail, and from existing industrial
uses close to the site. The air quality readings from this site, carried out as
technical evidence for the planning application, show parts of the site close to
the main roads as close to the national air quality objective for nitrogen dioxide,
146
147
City Policies and Sites, page 33
Employment Land Review, paragraph 9.59
- 95 -
which are set at a level to protect human health 148. Some measures have
been identified already as part of the extant outline consent that may help to
address the issue. These include; pollution control measures, such as cleaner
car engines and improved engine emissions, which, together with other
mitigation measures, such as completion of the Tinsley Link (which should
result in lower levels of traffic delay and therefore pollution levels at J34south),
and implementation of a travel plan. The issue of development for residential
uses close to road frontages should be assessed further at the detailed
planning stage.
• Any development at this site should not compromise the strategic objective of
focussing office development in the City Centre and other office locations
identified in the Core Strategy as being of higher priority than Meadowhall.
Any proposals should demonstrate that there is a City Centre and out of centre
balance maintained, in line with policy CS3 ’Locations for Office Development’.
The existing planning approval limits office development at phase 1 to
67,500m2, an office compliance statement would be required to justify phasing
of office uses.
Justification for Conditions
3.52
A development site of this scale will require measures to mitigate impact of traffic
generated by this development on nearby motorway junctions, to ensure the
continued operation of the strategic road network. The scale of likely
development that could be delivered on this site will have a considerable impact
on the already congested J34south. The Highways Agency has commented on
this issue, (see paragraph 3.61) and could object to a scale of development that
would affect the smooth operation of the national road network.
3.53
The Tinsley Link (see paragraph 3.321) is expected to provide a degree of relief
by providing an alternative route for those vehicles who can bypass the motorway
junction. However, analysis of expected trip generation for this site, as part of
submitted evidence for the planning application, concluded that there is a level of
development that can be accommodated before the Tinsley Link (or alternative
transport measure that can be proved to create additional highway capacity) has
to be in place. For the extant planning consent this is provided for by a legal
agreement that will require a proportion of the contribution toward the link road
to be paid as each phase of development is brought forward, Development will
also be limited in the area until it can be shown that the additional capacity at the
motorway junction is committed; and full contribution towards this will be required
by the time development reaches 67,500m2 of offices and 250 dwellings (or
equivalent mix in terms of traffic generation). Development beyond this threshold
148
The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, July 2007. The limit is
40uq/m3.
- 96 -
is then dependant on the completion of the Tinsley Link. For any new scheme a
similar analysis of traffic generation will be required.
3.54
The site is within a flood risk area, see paragraph 3.16. Mitigation of flood risk,
including flood protection measures, and a design for resilience to flooding, will
be needed across the entire site. As this is a large site it would be expected to be
delivered in a phased way. The planning consent requires approval of a flood
alleviation scheme for the whole site; this would be agreed with SCC and with the
Environment Agency as development of each phase is brought forward.
3.55
The site allocation includes a green link across the north of the site, along the line
of a former railway siding. This is consistent with the Core Strategy Spatial
Strategy for Green Corridors 149, and is shown on the Proposals Map. The site is
also identified to be of ecological importance, and this is supported by evidence
submitted as part of the planning application. The site layout should ensure the
green link is retained and its ecological value protected.
3.56
The site is located close to a Listed Building which is on the corner of Weedon
Street and Sheffield Road (the Former Sheffield Tram Depot, Listed Grade II).
Development at the site should have regard to the setting of the nearby listed
building when developing proposals for this site.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.57
There is likely to be potential negative transport impacts from housing and
business use creating additional congestion at Junction 34south. Mitigation
measures will be needed to reduce car use in this area for both congestion and
air quality reasons. The location of jobs and homes in this area close to the
Meadowhall Interchange should encourage wider use of public transport, and
there is potential opportunity to reduce the number of vehicles trips within the
area by locating homes and jobs together, and by requiring developers to
produce a travel plan to meet the specific needs of the area.
3.58
Housing development on this site has both positive and negative issues for
sustainability. The site is easily accessible by a range of transport to many
services and leisure facilities, and could contribute to increasing housing choice
within the housing regeneration area. However, housing in this area would be
relatively isolated from other residential areas. There are also concerns about
flood risk on this site.
3.59
The equality issues for this allocation indicate that although this area is very
accessible by car, within parts of the site, public transport routes may be more
than 400m away, which could cause problems at night for residents/workers that
do not have access to a car. The site could provide employment opportunities in
an area of low income and high unemployment. Mitigation measures to enable
149
Core Strategy paragraph 4.28
- 97 -
more employment opportunities, could include improvements to public transport
to bring high frequency routes closer to the site, and affordable transport
initiatives offered by employers to bring employees to the site. This could be
delivered via a travel plan. Labour training and employment initiatives such as
those offered by ‘The Source’ 150 would benefit those on low incomes and or
currently unemployed.
3.60
These have already been raised as issues to be addressed before the site is
delivered and this is dealt with in paragraph 3.51 and 3.52.
Consultee Preferences
3.61
At the consultation stages the following comments were made:
•
At Preferred Option Stage British Land (landowner) asked that the sites be
shown as one single site and allocation. The sites are now shown as one
single site as suggested. At Draft Plan stage they asked that the reasons for
the allocation be more in line with the planning consent and refer more
specifically to the entire range of uses. The flexible allocation deals with the
landowner’s ambition to create a mixed development at this site; and
provision of supporting neighbourhood centre is referred to in the delivery
paragraph 151.
•
At Preferred Option stage Transform South Yorkshire objected to the
promotion of this area for housing. They considered it an isolated location for
housing, but indicated that if housing was to be promoted then the sites
should be allocated for housing to allow the necessary planning for
community infrastructure. The site is being promoted for a range of new uses,
including housing, but allocation solely for housing is not appropriate as the
Core Strategy in CS7’ Meadowhall’ identifies the area as primarily an
employment location, and the aspirations of the landowners is for a mixed
development. Provision will be made as part of the site delivery to ensure
infrastructure and services needed to support a new residential community
are available 152.
•
The Highways Agency listed the sites as amongst its top 13 Sheffield sites for
impact on the national road network. They state that, given the size and
location of the site, a significant material impact could be predicted for
J34south of the M1 from development at this site 153, see paragraph 3.52.
150
http://www.thesource.meadowhall.co.uk/
British Land: Preferred Options Comment ID 899, 900, 901,& 902, Draft Comment ID 408
152
Transform South Yorkshire: Preferred Options Comment ID’s 1631,1632,1632 &1633
153
Highways Agency: Preferred Options Comment ID 1856 & 1859, Draft Comment ID 376
151
- 98 -
•
Tinsley Forum and Groundwork 154 commented on the importance of the
former railway embankment as a green corridor, see paragraph 3.55.
•
English Heritage 155 refer to the location of the Grade 2 listed Tinsley Tram
Sheds, see paragraph 3.56.
Effectiveness
Delivery
3.62
The site will be brought forward for development or promoted by the landowner,
in accordance with the approved planning consent which will expire in 2018. The
outline approval is supported by parameters plans that define the limits of the
development proposed, and allows for varying amounts of office, housing, and
other development (indicative plans are included on the application to show how
different scenarios could be delivered). The parameters plans allow for a large
degree of flexibility, such that the range of uses and amount of floor space that
can be developed on individual plots within River Don District can vary between
the maximum and minimum floorspace caps defined on the application.
3.63
It is expected that the site will be brought forward in phases over a number of
years once the further detailed consents have been brought forward.
3.64
Part of the site may be brought forward for car sales in accordance with planning
consent 10/01792/FULR which has been granted a certificate of lawful use
following submitted evidence that development has commenced 156. This does
not affect the ability of the remainder of the site to be brought forward for mixed
use as described above.
Flexibility and Risk
3.65
Site allocation without required uses means that the site can be still be delivered
for uses consistent with CS7 ‘Meadowhall’, but allows some flexibility for a mixing
of uses within the policy area. It provides for employment uses close to areas of
relatively high unemployment on both sides of the Lower Don Valley, but also
allows for housing, (having regard to site constraints particularly access to
neighbourhood facilities, and flood risk), the masterplanning aspirations for a
genuinely mixed community, and the provisions of the planning consent for the
site.
154
Tinsley Forum: Preferred Options Comment ID 443; Groundwork: Preferred Options Comment ID 896
& 904
155
English Heritage: Comment ID 765
156
Formerly site P00171 Application number 07/02074/FUL has been lawfully implemented. See
11/00703/LD2 approved 20/5/11. Part of the access road has been proved to be constructed prior to the
expiry of the 07 application.
- 99 -
Monitoring
3.66
See paragraph 3.37 . Monitoring will be also be done through the Sheffield
Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) and the Development
Management process.
P00129 Alsing Road (General Employment Area)
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.67
As the site is located within a General Employment Area, see Chapter 2
paragraphs 2.101 - 2.107 which detail how the policy area is consistent with
national policy and the Core Strategy.
3.68
The site is within an area covered by the Lower Don Valley Masterplan (2005)
see paragraph 2.107 which details the recommended land use approach for the
General Employment Area. This site is identified in this document as a
destination leisure opportunity to complement the overall regeneration of this part
of the Lower Don Valley. This is because at the time of the masterplanning
exercise this site was under active consideration for a regional casino
development, which due to later legislation changes governing casinos was not
taken forward. However, CS15 ’Locations for Large Leisure and Cultural
Development’ indicates that major leisure will be located in the Lower Don Valley
if there are no suitable or available sites available in the City Centre, and this site
could be suitable for leisure uses.
Justification
Alternative Options
3.69
See paragraph 2.108 which refers to choices for the General Employment Area.
3.70
At Preferred Option stage this site was allocated for park and ride to safeguard it
for that use. In policy CS57 ‘Park and Ride’ 157 the Lower Don Valley is identified
as a priority location for park and ride. The Core Strategy states that new sites
will be identified in the South Yorkshire Park-and-Ride Strategy which formed part
of the second local transport plan.
3.71
The third Local Transport Plan (see paragraph 1.55), states that the case for Park
& Ride schemes will continue to be examined as part of a package of transport
measures to address local transport issues, this is set out in the Public Transport
Action Plan (see paragraph 1.67), but does not identify specific sites for delivery,
and until more certainty can be provided about delivery of sites for park and ride,
this site is no longer allocated for this required use.
157
Core Strategy, page 104
- 100 -
3.72
The site is located in a prominent location adjacent the Tinsley viaduct and the
Supertram route to Meadowhall, and it is close to the Meadowhall Interchange.
This makes it particularly attractive for a range of uses that would both generate
employment and complement uses at the Meadowhall centre, in line with CS15.
The flexibility in the underlying policy area allows an opportunity to deliver a
range of uses reflecting the emphasis on employment uses in the area that is
required by CS7.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.73
The site is located close to the A6109 (Meadowhall Road) with easy access to
the M1 motorway via Junction 34north and south. The SYPTE Land Use
Integration Study scores this site as green, public transport intervention would not
be needed to bring this site forward, which supports the identification of this site
for employment uses. The site is within 150m of the Meadowhall Transport
Interchange, and the site is located within 150 metres of the Meadowhall Centre
with a range of shops and services.
3.74
This site was included within the selection of sites for the Employment Land
Review, (see paragraph 3.10). The conclusion for this site was that it provides a
very suitable site for the development of a range of employment uses by virtue of
its location within an area of strong market demand and access to the strategic
road network. The site is recommended in the report for allocation as an
employment site. This is consistent with the flexible allocation for this site 158.
3.75
There are problems to be addressed and these have been added as conditions
on development:
• As this site is close to J34south of the M1, development here could generate
trips that will add to existing congestion, see paragraph 3.82.
• The site is within a high risk flood risk zone, and functional floodplain, (see
paragraph 3.16). PPS25 requires that development should not proceed on
sites within this category, and they should be reserved to hold water at times of
need.
Justification for Conditions
3.76
158
As part of development proposals an assessment should consider whether
measures are necessary to mitigate the impact of traffic generated on nearby
motorway junctions, to ensure the continued operation of the strategic road
network. This would be addressed at the time of a planning application and is
likely to be best supported by effective use of a travel plan (policy E1
’Development and Trip Generation’).
Employment Land Review, paragraph 10.31
- 101 -
3.77
The landowners have been in discussion with the Environment Agency regarding
the status of this site, this is why conditions for development of this site require
that development should not proceed unless further modelling is undertaken by
the landowner or developer that confirms there are no areas of functional
floodplain within the site and this is agreed with the Environment Agency. At that
stage mitigation of flood risk will be needed, including flood protection measures
and a design for resilience to flooding for any uses proposed at this site
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.78
Any development on the site would benefit from high levels of accessibility, close
to the motorway but also close to the Meadowhall interchange. However, as a
consequence of development there could be potential transport impacts from
development at this site creating additional congestion at J34south. Mitigation
measures will be needed to reduce car use in this area, for both congestion and
air quality reasons. This would be dealt with by efficient use of a travel plan.
3.79
The site is identified as being at the highest level of flood risk and careful design
of development would be vital to minimise or mitigate this risk.
3.80
The equality issues for this allocation indicate that this area is very accessible by
car, which could cause problems at night for residents/workers that do not have
access to a car, but the site is close to the interchange at Meadowhall for access
to a range of public transport modes. The site could provide employment
opportunities in an area of low income and high unemployment.
3.81
These points have already been raised as issues to be addressed before the site
is delivered and this is dealt with in paragraph 3.76.
Consultee Preferences
3.82
At the preferred options consultation the following comments were made:
•
British Land supported the designation of the site within a flexible policy
designation, subject to the menu of uses including leisure uses in line with
their masterplanning ambitions 159, see paragraph 3.68. They objected to the
allocation for park and ride. This was because of the absence of evidence to
support the need for park and ride, and lack of analysis of any alternative
sites. The removal of the park and ride allocation is referred to in paragraph
3.70 above. Policy H1 provides for leisure uses to be decided on their merits,
and would be acceptable here provided it meets the location requirements of
National Policy and CS15 ‘Locations for Large Leisure and Cultural
Development’.
159
Preferred Options: comment ID 906, Draft stage: comment ID 409
- 102 -
•
At the draft consultation stage the Highways Agency 160 commented that
measures to mitigate impact of traffic on the nearby motorway junctions will
need to be assessed and they supported the intended approach to secure the
Tinsley Link (see paragraph 3.321).
•
The Environment Agency commented on the conditions of the allocation
which refer to the flood risk 161. They specifically noted the condition
'Development should not proceed unless further modelling is undertaken by
the developer that confirms there are no areas of functional floodplain within
the site and this is agreed with the Environment Agency'. They asked that this
modelling work should be done as part of a Level 2 SFRA prior to allocation
of this site. This has been dealt with by requiring this issue to be addressed
in agreement with the Environment Agency as a condition on development,
paragraph 3.77.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
3.83
The site will be brought forward for development or promoted by the landowner,
currently the site is in use as an overspill car park and coach park at busy times
of year.
3.84
A flexible allocation means that the site can be still be delivered for uses
consistent with CS7, and CS15; whilst taking on board the significant constraints
on this site, but allowing for its excellent accessibility (especially to a variety of
public transport). It allows flexibility for a range of uses that can provide
employment close to areas of relatively high unemployment on both sides of the
Lower Don Valley.
3.85
This site is identified as within the boundary of land that may potentially be
needed for phase 2 of the High Speed Rail (HS2) project. Details of the
consultation on the route are to be announced later in 2013 162. Dependent on the
preferred route decision this may affect delivery of this site.
Monitoring
3.86
See paragraph 3.37.
Sites in Business and Industry Areas
•
P00138 Former Betafence, Sheffield Road
160
Draft stage: Comment ID 377
Draft stage: Comment ID 813
162
www.hs2.org.uk
161
- 103 -
•
•
•
•
P00164 Sheffield Road
P00191 Sheffield Business Park Phase 2 (former Western runway
Sheffield Airport), Europa Link
P00471 Sheffield Business Park (Heliport), Europa Link
P00219 Woodbourn Road
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.87
These five sites are located within a Business and Industry Area; see Chapter 2
paragraphs 2.40 - 2.46 which detail how the policy area is consistent with national
policy and the Core Strategy.
Justification
Alternative Options
3.88
See Chapter 2 from paragraph 2.48 which refers to choices for the Business and
Industry Policy Area, which has determined the allocation choices for these sites.
3.89
Alternative land use options considered for these sites included:
P00138 Betafence:
3.90
At the Preferred Option stage a Business Allocation was considered for this site,
this was ruled out when the underlying policy area designation was changed, see
paragraph 2.53.
3.91
Ultimately there are two main options; either the site could be allocated
specifically for Business or Industrial Use, or allocated without required uses.
Under either scenario the site can be still be delivered for employment uses,
consistent with CS1 ’Land for Employment and Economic Development’, and
CS5 ’Locations for Manufacturing, Distribution/Warehousing, and other Non-office
Businesses’.
3.92
Leisure use was suggested as a potential land use allocation for this site. Policy
CS15 ‘Locations for Large Leisure and Cultural Development’ mentions the
Lower Don Valley is as a location for leisure uses that cannot be located within or
at the edge of the City Centre. This could be appropriate for this site, but sites
closer to Meadowhall Interchange are to be preferred as they are more
accessible. The policy area designation would allow leisure and recreation
facilities to be considered on their merits, but there is no evidence to support
explicit allocation at this site at the present time.
3.93
Residential use is rejected for this site. It could have been a possible land use
within the menu for the previously considered Business Area designation, but is
- 104 -
not an acceptable use within Industry and Business areas. A consultee at the
Preferred Options stage indicated that this site should not be promoted for
housing development due to its isolated location well away from other housing
uses and community infrastructure. Even with the significant amount of housing
proposed for the land adjoining the Meadowhall Centre, this site on the opposite
side of the dual carriageway, would be too detached. The redesignation of the
policy area to Industry and Business is consistent with this view.
P00164 Sheffield Road:
3.94
Given its location and surrounding environment, very close to the motorway
junction, between a major road, train, and tram lines, and the canal, this site was
proposed for allocation for required industrial uses at the Preferred Options stage.
Following comments from the landowners (see paragraph 3.112) the site
characteristics and constraints, and suitability for required industrial uses were
reviewed.
3.95
The site is very close to J34south of the M1, and at this point is difficult to access
for large vehicles, this is because the access is narrow and the road is always
very busy with traffic. The site access would be difficult to widen and use safely at
this point. Uses such as manufacturing and warehouse/distribution that require
regular access by large vehicles would be difficult to accommodate at this site.
There are also other site constraints (see paragraph 3.107 below) that indicate
that maximum flexibility for land uses would be the better option for this site.
P00191 Sheffield Business Park Phase 2 and P00471 Sheffield Business
Park (Heliport)
3.96
These sites are particularly suitable for business or industrial uses because they
are part of a larger existing employment area, which is planned by the
landowners as phase two of the Sheffield Business Park 163.
3.97
No alternative land uses options have been proposed for this site. This is
because:
•
P00191 has a long standing outline planning consent for a mixed
employment scheme, which is entirely in line with the proposed allocation
for employment uses, and which has been recently reviewed and
conditions updated 164.
163
http://www.sheffieldbusinesspark.co.uk/
04/04338/OUT, supplemented by 11/0610/OUT. This is a S73 application to vary conditions on the 04/
application to allow the scheme to be phased given the current economic climate, which is valid until
25/5/14. 10/ 01028/REM is a reserved matters application for the first part of SBP phase 2, for a B8 use,
valid until 28/6/14. Application uses are, 27,872m2 B1a offices; 27,273m2 B2 Research & Development
Light and General Industry; 25,084m2 B8 storage and distribution; and 3716m2 ancillary uses.
164
- 105 -
•
P00471 has existing uses within the site, and this allocation retains
flexibility to bring forward new uses or expand existing uses that are
compatible with the remainder of the business park. This area
accommodates the heliport which is to be retained (see paragraph 3.116
Delivery).
P00219 Woodbourn Road
3.98
At the landowner and Draft Plan consultation stages, one of the landowners who
controls land in the eastern part of the site, commented that a specific allocation
would be too restrictive, they wanted the opportunity to pursue an office scheme
on their land 165. However, the site lies outside of the areas specified in CS3
‘Locations for Office Development’, so an office or business designation would
not be appropriate here.
3.99
This site was proposed for allocation for preferred uses at the Draft Plan stage;
flexibility was a key factor at that stage as the site did not have independent
access, and access to the site would be via the adjacent site from Woodbourn
Road. At the Additional Sites stage, the landowner of the eastern part of the site
put forward land further to the east as a potential site allocation. At this stage the
site allocation was expanded to include land to the east, which includes site
access. However, as this part of the site has remaining buildings (recently
refurbished), and the site has other constraints that may affect its delivery, the
need for flexibility is still relevant.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.100 These sites are allocated for preferred uses for the following reasons:
3.101 P00138 Betafence
165
166
•
The range of uses arising from the proposed designation would generate
less traffic than the alternatives discussed from paragraph 3.90 and at
3.112 proposed by consultees, and could require less ambitious mitigation
measures.
•
This site was included within the selection of sites for the Employment
Land Review, (see paragraph 3.10). The conclusion for this site was that
an employment led, flexible approach should be used to bring this site
forward. This is consistent with the flexible allocation for this site 166.
•
The site is capable of providing employment uses close to areas of
relatively high unemployment in nearby Tinsley, and on the valley sides at
Draft stage: Comment ID 718
Employment Land Review, paragraph 9.59
- 106 -
Wincobank. It is also located on the A6178 (Sheffield Road) with easy
access to the M1 motorway via Junction 34south.
•
The site is served by public transport and it is directly next to the Carbrook
tram stop. It is approximately 1500m by road (or two tram stops) from the
Meadowhall Transport Interchange. There are bus stops outside the site
on Sheffield Road (route 69) which link the site to Sheffield City Centre, via
Attercliffe, or in the opposite direction to Tinsley and onwards to
Rotherham town centre. The SYPTE Land Use Integration Study scores
this site as green, public transport intervention would not be required to
bring this site forward, which supports the identification of this site for
employment uses.
•
The site is located next to the Meadowhall Retail Park with a range of
shops and services that could be used by employees.
3.102 P00164 Sheffield Road:
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites survey indicates this site is suitable for a
range of industry and business uses. It evaluates the site as available and
attractive, in terms of marketability.
•
To allocate the site for Preferred Uses allows a greater flexibility to deliver
a variety of uses, which is important, given the conditions on development
at this site, see paragraph 3.107, and the site constraints discussed at
paragraph 3.94.
•
The site is capable of providing employment uses close to an area of
relatively high unemployment in Tinsley.
•
The site is very accessible, it is directly located on the A6178 Sheffield
Road with direct access to junction 34south of the M1.The site is very well
served by public transport. There are bus stops directly outside the site on
Sheffield Road (route 69). The site is approximately 180m along the canal
towpath from the Tinsley tram stop, and one tram stop from the
Meadowhall Transport Interchange. The site located within 500m of the
Meadowhall Centre, with a range of shops and services for employees.
The SYPTE Land Use Integration Study scores this site as green, public
transport intervention would not be needed to bring this site forward, which
supports the identification of this site for employment uses.
•
This site located away from existing housing, so it could accommodate
uses that may be noisy or incompatible with a residential environment.
- 107 -
3.103 P00191 Sheffield Business Park Phase 2 (former Western runway Sheffield
Airport), Europa Link and P00471 Sheffield Business Park (Heliport), Europa
Link
167
•
The former airport runway is a significant area of land, which is available
for an alternative use now that the airport use has ceased. The heliport on
the northern boundary of the site is to be retained.
•
The sites are located in one of the four strategic employment locations
identified in the Core Strategy, and within an area specifically promoted
nationally by the landowners as a high quality out of city centre location for
businesses. Development here would benefit from proximity of other
established businesses, with good local and national reputations, in a
location that is highly accessible to the national road network.
•
The Core Strategy vision mentions Tinsley Park as a location for offices to
complement the City Centre 167. CS3 ‘Locations for Office Development’
supports this location as an alternative to the City Centre for those
businesses which require convenient access to the motorway network;
provided that Tinsley Park is carefully managed to ensure that the City
Centre does remain the primary office location for the city, and subject to
the 65% of office development provided in the city, is in the City Centre or
at its edge. Of the locations identified in CS3, Tinsley Park comes last on
the list, and it is not expected that the scale of offices would exceed what
is currently proposed.
•
Policy CS8 deals with the Tinsley Park Area, and indicates that major land
uses will be industry and warehousing/distribution. Tinsley Park will also
be a location for non-office businesses, with other office development
located only south of Europa Way. This acknowledges the fact that the
Sheffield Business Park already exists in this location and operates
successfully, and addresses the scope for expansion of similar uses in this
location.
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey includes site P00191 and
describes it as having potential for employment use. The site is identified
as available and very attractive. The study states the site is suitable for
high quality business park; warehousing/distribution; incubator/SME
cluster site. It considers that this is a high quality location and would suit all
B type uses due to its scale.
•
There is a small range of shops and services at the Sheffield Business
Park to serve employees at the site. The extant planning consent allows
Paragraph 4.13
- 108 -
for some expansion of these ancillary uses to provide for the needs of
employees at the site.
3.104 P00219 Woodbourn Road:
•
The site, over time, has become Greenfield on its eastern edge because it
has no independent access, and so has re-vegetated. Policy CS2
‘Business and Industrial Development on Brownfield and Greenfield
Land’ 168 requires that priority for development be given to previously
developed land. As the site is now a mix of Greenfield and Brownfield,
flexibility for development may assist the site to come forward.
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey describes this site as available
and attractive in terms of marketability. It states that the site would benefit
from regeneration but is well vegetated and is a naturalised Greenfield
site.
•
This site is particularly suitable for employment uses reflecting the Core
Strategy spatial policy for Parkway/Kettlebridge as set out in CS9. It is
located away from existing housing, within a well established employment
location, and has a prominent visibility from a key transport route so it
could, for example, accommodate manufacturing, or distribution and
warehousing type uses, but is equally suitable for non office businesses
(research and development and light industry).
•
The SYPTE Land Use Integration Study scores this site as green, public
transport intervention would not be needed to bring this site forward. The
site is served by access directly to the Nunnery Square tram on the edge
of the site; an access point would need to be created as part of a site
layout.
•
Main access would be from Woodbourn Rd with onward access to the
Parkway via Parkway Avenue.
Justification for Conditions
3.105 There are still some issues to be addressed for these and these have been
added as conditions on development as follows:
3.106 P00138 Betafence
•
168
This site is particularly close to J34s of the M1. Development here may
generate trips that may make congestion here severe. The Highways
Core Strategy, page 35
- 109 -
Agency has commented on this issue, see paragraph 3.112 and it is
expected that transport trips generated by development at this site,
combined with trips from other developments in the area (both anticipated
and committed), would lead to objections from the Highways Agency that
could lead to them using their Section 14 powers to prevent development
that would affect the smooth running of their network.
•
The Tinsley Link is expected to provide a degree of relief by providing an
alternative route for those vehicles who can bypass the motorway junction.
For this reason it is required that the Tinsley Link be committed and
programmed for development before there is any development at this site.
This is consistent with the provisions of CS59 ‘New Roads’ 169, see
paragraph 3.321 Tinsley Link.
•
A development site of this scale will also require measures to mitigate
impact of traffic generated by this development on nearby motorway
junctions, to ensure the continued operation of the strategic road network.
Measures that may be needed (in addition to the Tinsley Link requirement)
will be addressed the time of a planning application.
•
Part of the site at its north eastern edge is within a medium flood risk zone,
see paragraph 3.16, flood mitigation measures will be required as part of
any planning application to address the identified floods risk at this site.
This is consistent with policy CS67 ‘Flood Risk Management’.
•
The site is located close to a Listed Building which is on the opposite side
of Sheffield Road (the Former Sheffield Tram Depot, Listed Grade II.
Development at the site should have regard to the setting of the nearby
listed building when developing proposals for this site.
3.107 P00164 Sheffield Road
169
•
As this site is located close to J34south of the M1 development it could
generate trips that will add to existing congestion. As part of development
proposals an assessment should consider whether measures are
necessary to mitigate impact of traffic generated by this development on
nearby motorway junctions to ensure the continued operation of the
strategic road network.
•
The central part and eastern edge of this site is within a medium flood risk
zone, see paragraph 3.16. Development proposals at this site will be
required to show mitigation of flood risk, and any flood protection
measures as part of a planning application, and any schemes should be
Core Strategy, page 106
- 110 -
designed for resilience to flooding for any uses proposed at this site. This
is consistent with policy CS67.
•
As the previous usage of this site is unknown, but the site is known locally
as ‘Sheffield Tippers’ site, it is recommended that site survey is carried out
prior to any development proposals.
•
The Canal is classified as a watercourse and access is required for
maintenance, so development should be set back 5m to allow for this.
3.108 P00191 Sheffield Business Park Phase 2 (former Western runway Sheffield
Airport), Europa Link and P00471 Sheffield Business Park (Heliport), Europa
Link
•
These sites do not benefit from access to high frequency public transport.
The SYPTE Land Use Integration Study scores these sites as red, which
means they are located outside the walking catchment area for high
frequency bus routes used in the study. The sites are within 200m of a bus
stop on the A1 bus route which has a 30 minute frequency. A travel plan
that sets out all transport options, and indicates how public transport
deficiencies can be addressed would support development at these sites;
this would be consistent with CS53 ’Management of Demand for Travel’
and E1Development and Trip Generation’
•
These sites could benefit from the actions set out in the Public Transport
Action Plan see paragraph 1.67.
•
As these sites are located close to J33 and 34south of the M1, the scale of
development could generate trips that will add to existing congestion. As
part of development proposals, an assessment should consider whether
measures are necessary to mitigate impact of traffic generated by this
development. This is likely to be best achieved by effective use of a travel
plan.
•
Retention of heliport and operational areas will be required before the
surplus area at P00471 can be developed. Part of the site is used by
South Yorkshire Police and this area should remain available for this use
whilst needed.
3.109 P00219 Woodbourn Road
•
170
As part of the site is in a naturalised state it will need to comply with the
provisions of CS2 ’Business and Industrial Development on Brownfield and
Greenfield Land’ 170, this policy gives priority to development to Brownfield
Core Strategy, page 35
- 111 -
sites and indicates that Greenfield sites would be more likely to come
forward in later stages of the plan period, and after other Brownfield sites.
However, there is no evidence to show that this site could not come
forward in the longer term. An assessment at the time of a planning
application will need to show how the site complies with the Greenfield
development limit set out in the policy, see also Economy and City Region
Background Paper.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.110 The sustainability and equality issues are generally positive for employment uses
at all of these sites, and recognise the potential of sites to provide significant
employment opportunities. However, some issues have been picked up and
included as conditions on development; this is dealt with in the paragraphs from
3.105.
3.111 Issues include the following:
•
All these sites are located close to the motorway, or to main roads through
the area, which will provide for businesses requiring access to the national
road network. Sites P00191 Sheffield Business Park and P00471
Europa Link are not very well located for public transport access. This
may result in additional car journeys, or reduce employment opportunities
for those without access to a car. This may affect certain groups,
especially Black Minority Ethnic groups within the Lower Don Valley.
Development of these areas for employment uses with large numbers of
employees would require mitigation measures, including a requirement for
travel plans that meet the needs of the area, and that can include
measures to improve public transport access.
•
As a consequence of development there could be potential transport
impacts from sites P00138 Betafence and P00164 Sheffield Road
creating additional congestion at J34south. Mitigation measures may be
needed to reduce car use in this area for both congestion, and air quality
reasons. This would be dealt with by efficient use of a travel plan.
•
Sites P00138 and P00164 are also identified as having flood risk, careful
design of development would be vital to minimise or mitigate this risk.
Consultee Preferences
3.112 The following comments were made about these sites:
P00138 Betafence
• At Preferred Option stage comments were made
about the proposed Business Allocation and Business
- 112 -
Area 171, these were considered as part of the revision
to the policy areas designation referred to at Chapter
2 paragraph 2.53.
• Transform South Yorkshire objected to the promotion
of this area for housing (which would have been
possible under the previous Business Area
designation), see paragraph 3.93.
• The Highways Agency had commented at the
Preferred Options and Draft stages. They listed this
site as one of its top13 Sheffield sites that would have
an impact on the national road network, see
paragraph 3.106.
• English Heritage refer to the location of the Grade 2
listed Tinsley Tram, see paragraph 3.106.
• Indigo Planning considered that because of the
prominent location of this site, it should be allocated
for Headquarter office development. See Chapter 2
paragraph 2.53 which deals with choices for the
Business and Industry Area.
P00164 Sheffield
Road
• At the landowner consultation stage, the site owner
disagreed with a proposed allocation for required
uses. The point was made that a specific allocation
would be too restrictive on a site that has had both
hotel and office consents in the past 172, and is
located on a prominent route into Sheffield. Although
these would be the preferred types of land use for the
site owner, CS3 deals with locations for office
development, and refers to ‘around Meadowhall’ as a
location for office development. However, because of
the constrained and narrow nature of this site, it is
unlikely that large scale offices could be
accommodated.
• Provided a suitable and safe pedestrian route to the
171
British Land: Preferred Options Comment ID 909; Stirling Investments: Preferred Options Comment ID
1343; Highways Agency: Preferred Options Comment ID 1861, Draft stage Comment ID 378; Transform
South Yorkshire: Preferred Options Comment ID 1635; English Heritage: Draft Comment ID 766; Indigo
Planning: Draft Comment ID 837
172
02/03732/FUL, Erection of offices in 2 x three-storey blocks and 4 x two-storey blocks, Granted
Conditionally 18/02/2004 & 02/02349/OUT Erection of hotel and construction of a means of vehicular
access, Granted Conditionally 27/01/2004
- 113 -
Tinsley Supertram stop can be achieved from this site
(the current route is via the canal towpath which is
isolated and unlit), the site could meet the provisions
of CS3 for small scale office location. However
Sheffield Road is a significant barrier at this point
between this site and the wider area. Hotel use
would also be assessed against the provisions of H1
on its merits and the location provisions of National
Policy for hotel development.
• An allocation for preferred uses would allow the
requested flexibility for a range of possible land uses.
P00191 Sheffield
Business Park
P00471 Sheffield
Airport
• The Highways Agency, at the Preferred Options
stage 173, identified P00191 as one of their top 13
Sheffield sites that will have an impact on the national
road network. They considered that given the size
and location of the site, a significant material impact
from development at this site could be predicted for
J34south of the M1. At the Draft Plan stage they
additionally commented that mitigation measures on
nearby motorway junctions will need to be identified.
This is dealt with by a condition on the allocation see
paragraph 3.108.
• The landowner 174 has commented that the policy
designation and allocation of site P00191 is in line
with their aims for the site, and an extant planning
consent is in place to support this.
• P00471 came forward as a result of the landowner
consultation in September 2009. At the draft
consultation stage the landowner supported allocation
for business and industry uses as it reflects their
intended uses, (B1, B2 and B8), but commented that
the range of uses for this site should specifically
include B1a offices as a preferred use, and specific
reference should be made to the suitability of the site
as an alternative to the City Centre for office
location 175. This is dealt with by specifically referring
to Tinsley Park as an office location in the site listing.
• The Highways Agency raised issues about impact on
173
Preferred Options: Comment ID 1852, Draft: Comment ID 374
Preferred options: Comment ID 1116
175
Draft stage: Comment ID 75
174
- 114 -
the motorway this is also dealt with by including
mitigation measures as a condition on development
for these sites.
P00219 Woodbourn
Road
See paragraphs 3.98.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
3.113 All of these sites are in private ownership, and P00219 Woodbourn Road is in
multiple ownerships, and it is expected that they will be brought forward or
promoted by the landowners for development.
3.114 For sites P00138 Betafence, P00164 Sheffield Road, P00471 Sheffield Airport
and P00219 Woodbourn Road no specific proposals have been identified for
industrial development that can be detailed in this document, but there are no
irresolvable issues that would prevent any of these sites coming forward during
the plan period.
3.115 P00191 Sheffield Business Park has an existing planning consent which
provides the framework for delivery of this site (see paragraph 3.97), and
development will be brought forward by the landowner as phase 2 of Sheffield
Business Park. This site is also within the Sheffield City Region Enterprise Zone
(EZ) and the Council has produced a Local Development Order that includes this
site. The LDO promotes uses that help to deliver the EZ aims which are
advanced manufacturing and related technology together with other uses that
support these industries, see Chapter 2 paragraph 1.50 and 1.51. Development
that meets the requirements of the LDO at this site could be developed without
the need for a planning application.
3.116 Retention of heliport and operational areas will be required before the surplus
area at P00471 Sheffield Airport can be developed, see paragraph 3.97.
3.117 Some flexibility for mixing of land uses is built into policy J1’Development on
Allocated sites’ for sites that do not have required uses, see paragraph 3.42
above.
3.118 For all sites at the present time, there is a risk that landowners may delay
development of their land because of the current poor economic climate, which is
resulting in reduced investment in new development, and this has been
mentioned before as a factor for all employment sites.
- 115 -
3.119 The Sheffield Energy and Water Study has highlighted two infrastructure
constraints for P00164 Sheffield Road that will need to be addressed before this
site is delivered:
•
The National Grid asset plans show two gas mains crossing the site which
may need to be diverted to accommodate development. These mains
could be very difficult and expensive to divert as the pipes cross the canal
and railway either side of the site, and maintaining access could be difficult
due to the narrow nature of the site.
•
The YEDL asset plans also identify an overhead electricity line crossing
the site which may need to be diverted to accommodate development. It is
recommended that future development is designed to accommodate the
existing cables. Further investigation of both these issues will be required.
3.120 P00219 Woodbourn Road is in multiple ownerships, and so land assembly could
affect or delay delivery of this site. Joint working of landowners will be required to
bring this site to the market, and some site assembly will be needed to bring this
site forward. In addition existing buildings on the eastern part of the site will
either have to be accommodated within any new use, and access to the vacant
part of the site allowed for, or the site will need to be cleared.
Monitoring
3.121 See paragraph 3.37.
Conclusions on Soundness of Business or Industrial Allocations
3.122 The allocations of sites for Business or Industry is considered sound for the
following reasons:
3.123 They are positively prepared:
•
Safeguards land to deliver business and industrial development in
sustainable locations, by concentrating sites in locations where similar
uses are already well established, and where non-office business,
industry, and warehouses/storage (but not open storage) uses are
preferred.
•
Sites around Meadowhall are allocated consistent with development
requirements set out in the Lower Don Valley Masterplan, to deliver a new
employment led mixed use neighbourhood (Chapter 2 paragraph 2.10).
- 116 -
3.124 They are justified:
•
They are needed to deliver Local Plan objectives for employment already
in the Core Strategy. They provide land for employment and economic
development as set out in CS1, which identifies the need for a 5-year
supply for each type of land for offices and industry.
•
They are needed to provide sites in order to deliver Core Strategy policies
CS3 ‘Locations for Office Development’, requiring office uses to be
accessible, and CS7 for sites around Meadowhall, (Chapter 1 paragraph
2.10); and CS8 ‘Tinsley Park’ and CS9 ‘Attercliffe/Newhall and
Parkway/Kettlebridge’ (paragraph 2.44).
•
They are a combination of sites with and without required uses that are the
most appropriate and flexible when considered against the reasonable
alternatives (paragraphs 3.21 and 3.88). Sites with required use are
needed to meet market demand and give certainty for delivery of preferred
uses. Sites without required uses allow for greater flexibility to deliver a
range of employment uses, either where policy areas do not have a
preferred use (P00127 River Don District/P00129 Alsing Road) or where
site/delivery constraints may hinder delivery of a required use (paragraph
3.38).
•
The evidence is proportionate given the complex constraints in the Lower
Don Valley, especially in relation to sites near the motorway. See sites
P00127, P00129, P00138, P00164, P00191, P00471 and P00472.
3.125 They will be effective:
•
There are no irresolvable issues that would prevent any of these sites
coming forward during the plan period (paragraphs 3.33, 3.65, 3.83 and
3.113).
•
Sites P00127 River Don District and P00191 Sheffield Business Park
have extant planning consents that provide an indicative framework for
their delivery, see paragraphs 3.48 and 3.97.
3.126 They are consistent with national policy:
•
Allocations provide a range of sites safeguarded for employment use in
suitable and sustainable locations, that will help new business establish
and existing business prosper (NPPF paragraph 19 ‘Building a strong
competitive economy’).
- 117 -
•
Allocations north and south of the Meadowhall Centre (P00127/P00129)
specifically support the promotion of mixed use development and
encourage multiple benefits from use of land (NPPF paragraph 17 point 9).
Allocation Type – Industry
Sites with Required Uses
Introduction
3.127 These sites are allocated for required uses, General Industry (B2 or other,
unclassified industrial/ processing uses) or warehouses/ storage (B8). The
proposed land uses for these site allocations are all consistent with City Policy H1
and they are all located within Industrial Areas on the proposals Map.
Development should be in accordance with the provisions of City Policy J1 (a).
There are 12 sites within this category.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
P00137 Barleywood
P00140 Broadoaks
P00145 Catley Road
P00153 Faraday Road
P00160 Former Dr John Worrall
P00174 Lumley Street
P00178 Next Shepcote House
P00182 Outokumpu
P00187 Ripon St
P00473 Tinsley Marshalling Yards WEST
P00474 Tinsley Marshalling Yards EAST
P00501 Foley St
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.128 These twelve sites are all located within an Industrial Area; see Chapter 2
paragraphs 2.77 - 2.81 which detail how the policy area is consistent with national
policy and the Core Strategy.
Justification
Alternative Options
3.129 See Chapter 2 paragraphs 2.82- 2.86 which refer to choices for the Industrial
Policy Area.
- 118 -
3.130 No alternative land uses options have been proposed for the following sites:
P00137 Barleywood
P00140 Broadoaks
P00145 Catley Road
P00153 Faraday Road
These sites are all particularly suitable for industrial
uses because they are generally large and flat, and
surrounded by existing similar uses, and may
benefit from co-location.
P00160 Former Dr John
Worrall
P00174 Lumley Street
P00187 Ripon St
P00501 Foley St
3.131 For these sites no alternative land uses were proposed for the following reasons:
P00178 Next Shepcote
House
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey
identified the site as close to the Sheffield
Business Park, which is an attractive area for
higher value firms. However, the site lies
outside of the areas specified in CS3 for office
development, so an office or business
designation would not be appropriate here.
P00182 Outokumpu
•
The site is a large part of the Tinsley Park
industrial area, which because of its size and
location, is a very important site for meeting
Sheffield’s needs for industrial land in line with
policy CS1. Its location is particularly well placed
to support and complement the growing
advanced manufacturing sector in the Sheffield/
Rotherham economic corridor.
•
It is already acknowledged by consultees that
highway capacity is a major constraint for this
site; see paragraph 3.153. This would rule out
alternative land uses that are major traffic
generators that could continue to cause
additional major capacity problems for the
motorway junctions, even with significant
mitigation (including the Tinsley Link).
•
Despite its proximity and visibility from the M1,
this is not a location that would not be supported
by national policy, or the Core Strategy (in
- 119 -
particular policy CS3) for uses such as office or
retail.
P00473 Tinsley
Marshalling Yards WEST
•
These sites are particularly suited to industrial
uses because they are located within the Tinsley
Park industrial area. The overall size and
location of this area is very important area for
meeting Sheffield’s needs for industrial land in
line with policy CS1.
•
Their location is particularly well placed to
support and complement the growing advanced
manufacturing sector in the Sheffield/
Rotherham economic corridor, and could be
particularly suitable for industry and
warehousing/ distribution to complement the
recently completed regeneration of the wider
marshalling yards site.
P00474 Tinsley
Marshalling Yards EAST
Justification for Choice of Option
3.132 All twelve sites generally meet the location requirements of policy CS5 ‘Locations
for Manufacturing, Distribution/Warehousing and other Non-office business’ 176,
which lists the Lower Don Valley at point (a); and dependent on where the site is
located within the valley, policy CS8 ‘Tinsley Park’ or CS9 ‘Attercliffe /Newhall
and Parkway Kettlebridge 177
3.133 All of the sites are close to existing communities on the sides of the valley (parts
of which suffer from high unemployment), and can provide for local job
opportunity close to high frequency public transport that connects to local
communities or the city centre. But are also located sufficiently far enough away
so that so potential for adverse impact on sensitive land uses, particularly existing
housing, is minimal.
3.134 For those sites indicated below, where access to high frequency public transport
could be an issue in attracting and retaining employees, a travel plan that sets out
all transport options, and indicates how public transport deficiencies can be
addressed, would support development. This would be consistent with
CS53’Management of Demand for Travel’, and Policy E1’Development and Trip
Generation’.
3.135 These sites could benefit from the actions set out in the Public Transport Action
Plan see Chapter 1 paragraph 1.67.
176
177
Core Strategy, paragraph 6.16
Core Strategy, paragraphs 6.25, and 6.28
- 120 -
3.136 For each site there are issues to be resolved before sites can come forward and
these include :
3.137 P00137 Barleywood
•
The identified use is supported by the Sheffield Employment Sites Survey,
which identifies the site as suitable for general industrial/business and
incubator/SME cluster. Using the appraisal criteria set out in the study
(quality, market demand & availability) it considers that the site can be
brought forward without public intervention.
•
The site is located on the A6102 (Greenland Road) with easy access to
the M1 motorway via A631 (Shepcote Lane) to J34south.
•
The site is located within 1km of the Darnall District Centre with a range of
shops and services including banks to serve employees at the site.
•
However, the nearest high frequency bus route (number 52) is around 1km
walk away. Less frequent bus services (routes 1, 7, and 28) which
between them serve local areas, the City Centre, and Meadowhall operate
via Greenland Road, but the nearest bus stop is around 200m away on
Greenland Road. See paragraph 3.134.
3.138 P00140 Broadoaks
•
This site can provide employment opportunities within 300m of a high
frequency bus route (number 52) at Staniforth Road that can provide easy
access to the neighbouring Darnall and Attercliffe areas, and is within
250m of a Supertram stop at Woodbourn Road. The SYPTE Land Use
Integration Study scores this site as green, public transport intervention
would not be needed to bring this site forward.
•
The allocation is supported by the Sheffield Employment Sites Survey. It
identifies the site as suitable for general industrial/business and
heavy/specialist industrial. Due to its relatively small size it considers it
most suitable for SME units.
•
The site has easy access to the A6178 (Attercliffe Road) via Jessell Street
and Woodbourn Road with onward easy access to the M1 motorway via
J34south.
•
The site located within 700m of the Attercliffe Neighbourhood Centre (bus
route 52), with a range of shops and services, including banks, to serve
employees at the site.
- 121 -
3.139 P00145 Catley Road
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey identifies the site as suitable for
general industrial/business and heavy /specialist industrial, which supports
the allocation.
•
The site is located close to the A6102 (Greenland Road) via Catley Road
with easy access to the M1 motorway via A631 (Shepcote Lane) to
J34south.
•
There are still problems to be addressed: There is no evidence that the
site has ever been developed. The site is grassland and currently used for
grazing. Development of the site would have to be in accordance with
policy CS2 ‘Business and Industrial Development on Brownfield and
Greenfield Land‘ 178. This policy gives priority to development to Brownfield
sites and indicates that Greenfield sites would be more likely to come
forward in later stages of the plan period and after other Brownfield sites.
However, there is no evidence to show that this site could not come
forward in the longer term and allow for other Brownfield sites in the area
to come forward first.
•
The site is not well located for accessible public transport for employees.
The nearest high frequency bus route (number 52) is over 900m walk
away, and the SYPTE Land Use Integration Study scores this site as red,
which means it scores as being outside the walking catchment area used
in the study. In their view, public transport improvement would be needed
to bring this site forward. Less frequent bus services serving the local area,
City Centre and Meadowhall (routes 1, 7 and 28) operate via Greenland
Road, but this is still around 750 m to the nearest bus stop. See paragraph
3.134 above.
3.140 P00153 Faraday Road
178
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey supports the allocation but
identifies the site as a low quality site, only attractive to B2 lower value
businesses in its current state, see bullet point 4 below.
•
The site is less than 200m from a bus stop on a high frequency bus route
(route 52 via Attercliffe Road). The SYPTE Land Use Integration Study
scores this site as green, public transport intervention would be not
needed to bring this site forward. The site has easy access to the A6178
Attercliffe Road with onward easy access to the city centre and to the M1
motorway via J34south.
•
There are problems to be addressed. The site is identified as within a
medium risk flood risk area, see paragraph 3.16, and this is identified as a
condition on development see paragraph 3.148.
Core Strategy, page 33
- 122 -
•
The site is very overgrown and would need some clearance to remove
remains of former structures. Visibility into the site is poor as it is enclosed
by a high wall. Depending on the end use, this could be a security
advantage, or may need to be removed to enable more efficient use of the
site.
3.141 P00160 Former Dr John Worrall
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey identifies the site as a vacant site
that could be occupied immediately and would benefit from regeneration.
•
The site has easy access to the A6178 Attercliffe Common with onward
easy access to the city centre and to the M1 motorway via J34south.
•
The site can provide employment opportunities close to good public
transport routes. A number of bus services operate via Attercliffe Common
where the nearest bus stop is located. The 69 route offers a 3 bus per
hour service to the City Centre and Rotherham; a less frequent service
(17a) offers a route that serves the city centre, linking to communities on
the northern valley side and Meadowhall. The site is around 600m from
the Supertram stop at Don Valley Stadium/Arena. The SYPTE Land Use
Integration Study scores this site as green, public transport intervention
would not be needed to bring this site forward.
•
The site located within 300m of the Attercliffe Centre with a range of shops
and services including banks to serve employees at the site.
•
There are problems to be addressed. A part of the site is identified as
within a medium risk flood risk area, see paragraph 3.16, and this is
identified as a condition on development, see paragraph 3.148.
•
Measures to mitigate the impact of traffic on the nearby motorway
junctions will be required as part of development proposals.
•
A culverted watercourse has been identified as crossing the development
site. Development proposals should allow for a four metre easement to
protect this watercourse, this will reduce the developable area of the site.
3.142 P00174 Lumley Street
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey supports the proposed allocation
and identifies the site as available and suitable for B1c light industrial or
small B2 uses.
•
It is close to the A57 Parkway via Bernard Road giving good transport
connections around the city and to the M1 motorway.
•
The site can provide employment opportunities close to good public
transport routes. The site is around 800m from a bus stop on high
- 123 -
frequency route 52 on Staniforth Road, and around 500m from the
Woodbourn Road Supertram stop. It is also within 800m of the Cricket Inn
Road Tram stop, and Nunnery Square stop (for park and ride facilities).
The SYPTE Land Use Integration Study scores this site as green, public
transport intervention would not be needed to bring this site forward.
•
There are some infrastructure problems to be addressed that will need to
be investigated further before this site is delivered, these are:
•
It is possible that some of the electricity demand required by development
of this site will not be accommodated from the local network surrounding
the site, without triggering need for offsite reinforcement. Costs of
increasing the capacity may need to be built into any scheme.
•
Yorkshire Water have identified that a section of public sewer is recorded
as crossing the site. A stand-off distance of between 3m and 6m are
required at each side of the sewer. This requirement may reduce the
developable area of the site, as the diversion route is considered unlikely
to be practical. This could be addressed by development that incorporates
a sewer easement to optimise the developable area.
•
A surface water culvert has been identified as crossing the development
site. At this stage it has been assumed that it will not be feasible to divert
the culvert, and therefore the developable area may be reduced.
3.143 P00178 Next Shepcote House
•
This site has a prominent location on a main road frontage that leads
directly to J34south of the M1; this would make it an attractive site to the
market.
•
There are problems to be addressed for this site. The SYPTE Land Use
Integration Study scores this site as red, which means it is located outside
the walking catchment area for high frequency bus routes used in the
study. The site is approximately100m from a bus stop on the A1 bus route
which has a 30 minute frequency. See paragraph 3.134.
•
Development here could generate trips that will add to existing congestion
at J34south, see conditions at paragraph 3.148.
3.144 P00182 Outokumpu
•
179
180
The Core Strategy Vision identifies the distinctive contribution that Tinsley
Park has to make to the regeneration of the Lower Don Valley 179. It is
close to the Waverley Advanced Manufacturing Park in Rotherham 180. It
has large flat sites well suited to industrial development, located away from
Core Strategy, paragraphs 4.13-14
WaverleyAMP
- 124 -
residential areas (the nearest residential area is Tinsley on the other side
of the M1 motorway), and it is accessible by public transport, with potential
for this to improve. This site is a key part of this Tinsley Park area.
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey identifies the site as a vacant
parcel of land which constitutes an opportunity area for future
development. It considers the site suitable for general industrial/business,
heavy/specialist industrial and incubator/SME cluster sites.
•
It is situated in a prominent location highly visible from Shepcote Lane,
which is a busy route linking to Junction 34south of the M1, and the site is
also highly visible from the M1 motorway. This would make the site very
attractive when marketed.
•
There are a number of problems to be addressed at this site and these
have been included as conditions on development, see paragraph 3.148.
•
The key problem for this site is the potential for severe impact on the
national road network. The size of this site means that, even for the low
traffic generating uses that may be anticipated by an allocation for
industrial uses, there will be an unacceptable number of trips generated
that could use an already at capacity J34south. There is also a risk that
the Highways Agency could use their Section 14 powers to prevent
development that would affect the smooth running of their network, this
could cause harm to the economic development and reputation of the
area. For this reason it is a condition of development on this site that the
Tinsley Link should be contractually committed before the main phase of
development starts, and that there are other mitigation measures
incorporated to address impact on the national road network.
•
The SYPTE Land Use Integration Study scores this site as ‘red’ which
means it scores as being outside the walking catchment area used in the
study, and is not accessible to high quality public transport. The site is
adjacent to a bus stop on Shepcote Lane on the A1 bus route, which has a
30 minute frequency. The Supertram stop at Tinsley is around 600m walk
from the site, but this is via the canal towpath, an alternative on road route
is much further. A travel plan that sets out all transport options and
indicates how public transport deficiencies can be addressed, including
provision of safe pedestrian routes within and around the site, would
support development at this site; see paragraph 3.134.
•
A section of public sewer is recorded as crossing the site and a stand-off
distance of between 3 and 6 metres are required at each side of the
sewer. This requirement may reduce the developable area of the site,
unless it can be demonstrated that the network can be reasonably diverted
or relocated.
3.145 P00187 Ripon Street
- 125 -
•
The Sheffield Employment Sites Survey states that the site would be
suitable for small B1(c) units, and small B2 or B8 units.
•
The site is approximately 400m from a bus stop on high frequency bus
route 52 along Staniforth Road. The site is approximately 200m from the
Woodbourn Road tram stop. The SYPTE Land Use Integration Study
scores this site as green, public transport intervention would not be
needed to bring this site forward.
•
The site is located close to the A57 Parkway via Parkway Avenue, or via
Woodbourn Road and Staniforth Road to A6178 Attercliffe Road with easy
access to the M1 motorway to Junction 34south.
•
The main issue to be addressed is the multiple ownership of the site,
which may affect site delivery, see paragraph 3.154.
3.146 P00473 Tinsley Marshalling Yards WEST
P00474 Tinsley Marshalling Yards EAST
•
These two sites are located close to Europa Link with easy access to the
M1 motorway via Shepcote Lane (A631) to J34south and to the Parkway
(A630) at its eastern end.
•
P00474 (east site) is situated in a prominent location, highly visible from
Europa Link and benefits from new access infrastructure that has been
installed to serve the wider Tinsley Marshalling Yards area. The former
Tinsley Marshalling yards has been partly redeveloped with large industrial
sheds alongside the rail line with freight access suitable for businesses
with this requirement. The east site is well placed to support or
complement this larger development. This would make the site very
attractive when marketed.
•
P00473 (west site) would probably be best served for rail purposes or to
support activities on adjacent sites, as access is constrained for this site.
•
There are problems to be addressed for these sites. The sites are not on
a high frequency bus route, but are within 200m of a bus stop on the A1
bus route which has a 30 minute frequency, see paragraph 3.134.
•
As these sites are located close to J34south of the M1 development they
could generate trips that will add to existing congestion, see paragraph
3.148.
3.147 P00501 Foley Street
•
The flood risk issues at this site, see point 4 below, would make it
unsuitable for more vulnerable or sensitive uses.
- 126 -
•
The site can provide employment opportunities reasonably close to the
City Centre with good public transport connections. The site has easy
access to the A6178 Attercliffe Road with onward easy access to the city
centre and to the M1 motorway via J34south. The site is around 300m
from a bus stop on a high frequency bus route (via Attercliffe Road).
•
The site has two main problems to be addressed. The site is located within
a Zone 3a and Zone 2 flood risk area on the SFRA, (see paragraph 3.16)
which sets it at a risk of medium and high risk flooding.
•
The site includes the remains of earlier buildings on the site that are some
historical importance. In particular the Smith Wheel, water powered wheel
fed from the Sheaf through a goit into the River Don. A programme of
archaeological works should be agreed as part of any planning consent to
safeguard any archaeological remains. These are both dealt with by a
condition on development, see paragraph 3.148
•
The site boundary is adjacent to the Norfolk Bridge which is a grade 2
listed building.
Justification for Conditions
3.148 Several of the site allocations have conditions required to address specific needs
as follows:
P00137 Barleywood
P00140 Broadoaks
P00145 Catley Road
P00174 Lumley Street
P00187 Ripon Street
There are no conditions on development for these
allocations.
P00153 Faraday Road
Proposals for development will be required to show
how the flood risk can be mitigated, including flood
protection measures and design for resilience to
flooding across the entire site. This is consistent with
policy CS67 ’Flood Risk Management’.
P00160
Former Dr John Worrall
P00178
Next Shepcote House
As part of development proposals, an assessment
should consider whether measures are necessary to
mitigate impact of traffic generated by this
development on nearby motorway junctions in order
to ensure the continued operation of the strategic
road network. This is likely to be best achieved by
effective use of a travel plan (policy E1’Development
and Trip Generation’).
P00182 Outokumpu
• The Tinsley Link is expected to provide a degree
- 127 -
of relief by providing an alternative route for
those vehicles who can bypass the motorway
junction. For this reason it is required that the
Tinsley Link be committed and programmed for
development before there is any development at
this site. This is consistent with the provisions of
CS59 ‘New Roads’, see also paragraph 3.321
Tinsley Link.
• The Highways Agency, in their comments, point
towards some possible mitigation measures
(subject to later assessment and agreement)
including travel plan, measures to limit car
usage, improved bus routes, and a free shuttle
from local centres. Given the severity of existing
congestion on the motorway between Junctions
30 and 36, it requests that capacity
enhancements be identified so that they can be
secured via the planning process, see paragraph
3.153.
• An independent access to serve the J34 trading
estate at Greasboro Road, which lies to the north
of this site, should be provided via site to relieve
existing residential properties on Greasboro
Road. This can be achieved by accommodating
a route into the trading estate through the
development, site as part of overall development
proposals. This would allow Greasboro Road to
only serve the existing housing, which would
much improve the already difficult living
conditions for residents that live directly next to
the motorway.
• Any future site layout should accommodate a
new green link across the valley, this is
consistent with the Core Strategy Spatial
Strategy for Green Corridors 181 and is shown on
the Proposals Map, see also site P00473 which
lies adjacent this site.
181
P00473
Tinsley Marshalling
Yards WEST
• If it were to be developed independently, access
to P00473 have to be negotiated with the
adjoining landowner.
P00474
• Measures to mitigate the impact of traffic see
Core Strategy, paragraph 4.28
- 128 -
Tinsley Marshalling
Yards EAST
P00501 Foley St
P00178 above.
• Any future site layout should accommodate a
new green link, this is consistent with the Core
Strategy Spatial Strategy for Green Corridors
and is shown on the Proposals Map, see also
site P00182 which lies adjacent this site.
• For flood risk, proposals will need to comply with
the provisions of Core Strategy policy CS67’
Flood Risk Management’. A site specific flood
risk assessment will be required as part of
development proposals. Flood protection
measures and design of buildings to be resilient
to flood will be required over the entire site.
• A programme of archaeological works should be
agreed as part of any planning consent to
safeguard any archaeological remains, and any
development should respect the setting of the
listed structure.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.149 The sustainability and equality appraisals recorded generally positive impacts for
industrial use on these twelve sites. Apart from P00145 Catley Road they are all
previously developed sites.
3.150 Some negative impacts are recorded for sites P00137 Barleywood, P00145
Catley road, P00178 Next Shepcote House, P00182 Outokumpu, P00473 and
P00474 Tinsley Marshalling Yards east and west, due to their relatively poor
access by high frequency public transport that may result in additional car
journeys, or reduce employment opportunities for those without access to a car.
The main equality impact around is access to public transport for those without
private transport, and this may affect certain groups especially Black and Minority
Ethnic groups within the Lower Don Valley. Mitigation measures could explore
public transport improvements to this site to encourage users to use public
transport as part of a travel plan and improve connectivity to facilities for
employees. See paragraph 3.134 where this is raised as an issue to be resolved
before these sites are delivered.
3.151 The need for mitigation of flood risk and flood protection measures is raised for
sites P00153 Faraday Road , P00160 Dr John Worrall, and P00501 Foley
Street, and this is included as a condition on development, see paragraph 3.148.
- 129 -
3.152 For all sites, uses which encourage the use of the private car, or because of
operational need may lead to increased HGV movements, could have a negative
impact on the local road network. A travel plan that sets out all transport options
and indicates how resulting impacts can be addressed will support development;
this would be consistent with CS53 ’Management of Demand for Travel’ , and
City Policy E1’Development and Trip Generation’.
Consultee Preferences
3.153 The following comments were made regarding these twelve allocations:
P00137 Barleywood
At the landowner consultation (2009) the
landowners commented that the policy
designation and allocation of this site is in line
with their aims for the site. No other comments
have been made regarding this site.
P00140 Broadoaks
P00145 Catley Road
No comments have been made regarding these
sites.
P00153 Faraday Road
P00174 Lumley Street
P00178 Next Shepcote House
P00187 Ripon Street
Landowners for these sites, who responded to
the landowner’s consultation, commented that
the policy designation and allocation of this site
is in line with their aims for their sites.
P00160 Former Dr John
Worrall
At the Preferred Options stage, Sport England
commented that development would affect
recreation facilities at this site 182. Unfortunately
the football pitch which served the former school
located at this site was lost when the site was
cleared for industrial development. No other
comments have been made regarding this
allocation.
P00182 Outokumpu
Comments made at consultation stage about this
site related to two main threads:
• With regard to the allocation for industrial
uses, the landowner had commented at the
landowner consultation stage (2009) that the
policy designation and allocation of this site is
not in line with their aims for the site. They
would require a more flexible allocation
identifying a wider range of uses, in order to
react to market demand. However, they
182
Preferred Option: Comment ID1767
- 130 -
acknowledge that a potential high impact on
the motorway junction will make delivery of
the site difficult to predict, see paragraph
3.148
• The Highways Agency 183 at the Preferred
Option stage listed this site as one of its top
thirteen city sites where it predicts that
development would adversely impact on the
national road network. Their comments
noted the poor accessibility of the site by
public transport, and noted that the location of
the site means that not many people may
choose to walk there. Most importantly that
M1 J34south is already operating at capacity
and there is potential to add to it from this
site, even with mitigation measures in place,
see paragraph 3.148.
P00473 Tinsley Marshalling
Yards WEST
P00474 Tinsley Marshalling
Yards EAST
These are sites suggested by the landowner as
part of landowner consultation in January 2010,
and were supported by the landowner at the
Draft stage 184
At the Draft stage the Highways Agency
commented on the potential for these sites to
generate additional traffic that will add to
congestion at J34south of the M1, this is dealt
with by a condition on development 185 see
paragraph 3.148.
P00501 Foley St
This site was added at the additional sites stage,
several comments were made at the Additional
Sites consultation 186:
•
The Environment Agency referred to the
need to deal with flood risk at the site as
part of development proposals, and English
Heritage referred to the importance of the
nearby Listed Norfolk Bridge, these issues
are dealt with by a condition on
development, see paragraph 3.148.
183
Preferred options: Comment ID 1853, Draft stage: Comment ID 373
Draft stage: Comment ID 449 and 450
185
Draft stage: Comment ID 375
186
Environment Agency: Comment ID 413; English Heritage Comment ID 445;
184
- 131 -
•
The Wildlife Trust and Natural England 187
referred to the importance of the natural
environment and ecology importance of the
River Don which forms the northern
boundary of this site. As the river is
designated as a site of importance for
nature on the Proposals Map, any
development adjacent would need to comply
with policy G1 ‘Safeguarding and Enhancing
Biodiversity and Features of Geological
Importance’ which safeguards and protects
these areas for their wildlife value 188.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
3.154 All of these sites are in private ownership, some are in multiple ownerships, and it
is expected that they will be brought forward or promoted by the landowners for
development. For all sites at the present time, there is a risk that landowners may
delay development of their land, either intentionally, awaiting a more favourable
market or proposal to come forward, or because of depressed markets for
development/investment. This could particularly apply to those sites with
multiple landowners. In all cases no specific proposals have been identified for
industrial development that can be detailed in this document, but there are no
irresolvable issues that would prevent any of these sites coming forward during
the plan period.
3.155 Whilst these sites are allocated for industrial uses, the reasoning is given in the
paragraphs above, and the land is safeguarded to meet specific employment
needs, some flexibility is built in by policy J1 which would allow up to 20% of the
sites to come forward for other uses, as determined acceptable within the
Industrial Area.
3.156 For those sites in less accessible locations by public transport, use of a travel
plan to identify the best means to access the site by public transport would help
to address public transport constraints for this site, and this has already been
identified as an issue arising from the sustainability and equality appraisals.
3.157 For some sites a marketing effort will be needed to bring the site forward. For
example, some sites are not in a prominent location (P00137Barleywood,
P00140 Broadoaks, P00145 Catley Road, P00153 Faraday Road, P00174
Lumley Street, P00473 and P00474 Tinsley Marshalling Yards east and
west). On site P00140 clearance and levelling may be needed. P00145 has a
187
188
Sheffield Wildlife Trust Comment ID 583; Natural England Comment ID 606
City Policies and Sites, page 71
- 132 -
Greenfield appearance and is tucked away at the edge of the industrial area
close to the Green Belt, which may result in other sites in this area coming
forward for development before this one, and P00153 is hidden behind a high
brick boundary wall.
3.158 Other sites are in prominent locations are within busy industrial areas which
should help in promoting the sites to investors (P00160 Dr John Worrall, P00178
Next Shepcote House, P00182 Outokumpu, P00187 Ripon Street, and
P00501Foley St).
3.159 For site P00160 Former Dr John Worrall, pre application discussion was held
with the landowner in 2009 for a mixed industrial led scheme, and planning
consent was given for part of the site in 2010 for six industrial units, this will
expire in October 2013. The planning application includes an indicative
masterplan for the whole site which explains the landowner ambitions for this site
and which is in line with the allocation 189.
3.160 Site P00178 Next Shepcote House is highly visible from Shepcote Lane, a busy
route linking to J34south of the M1; this would make the site very attractive when
marketed for employment uses. However, the site has previously been used for
car storage and distribution 190, and this has recently been resurrected by the
landowner who also, to take advantage of this visibility, has obtained permission
to use part of the frontage for car sales 191. The remainder of the site would still
be available, but this frontage use may delay the remainder of the site coming
forward. However, in principle, this would not affect the potential for an industrial
use to come forward on all or part of the site.
3.161 P00182 Outokumpu is the largest industrial site. As with other sites this site will
be brought forward for development or promoted by the landowner. This is an
important site for industrial uses as Tinsley Park is a key employment area in the
Lower Don Valley and it is important that a large part of the site is delivered for
these uses, to reinforce the industrial importance of this area.
3.162 To help with delivery of new employment uses this site is within the Sheffield City
Region Enterprise Zone (EZ). The EZ is built on removing the barriers to growth
and delivery of the wider vision for the Sheffield-Rotherham Economic Corridor as
a key manufacturing asset of the Sheffield City Region, and this site will benefit
from simplified planning procedures and financial incentives. The site is
supported by targeted marketing via the Sheffield City Region website 192 . Also
see Chapter 1 paragraph 1.50.
3.163 This site does though need some preparation for regeneration, and due to its size
may be delivered in phases. In addition, the site is dependent on the delivery of
189
10/02143/FUL
Planning application reference 85/4270p, this was recently confirmed by a lawful use application
11/03551/LU1 granted 9/1/13
191
Planning application reference 12/03480/FUL
192
www.sheffieldenterprisezone.co.uk/tinsley-park
190
- 133 -
the Tinsley Link, see paragraph 3.148, this may delay delivery of the site. Part of
this site is also identified as within the possible alignment for phase 2 of the High
Speed Rail (HS2) project. This may also be a potential constraint on delivery.
3.164 P00187 Ripon Street is split across Ripon Street and so it is more likely the site
would be brought forward as two small schemes. But, in its favour, the site is
close to Woodbourn Road, which is a busy route linking to the Sheffield Parkway
via Parkway Avenue. This would make the site attractive when marketed.
3.165 P00501 Foley Street - Parts of this site has planning consent for storage of plant
and car parking associated with nearby businesses 193. This use could easily be
relocated should proposals for the allocated use come forward. For this site
development layouts should avoid the areas of highest risk of flood, this may
reduce the developable area of the site, see paragraph 3.148.
Monitoring
3.166 See paragraph 3.37.
Conclusions on Soundness of Industrial Allocations
3.167 The allocations of sites for Industrial Use, is considered sound for the following
reasons.
3.168 They are positively prepared:
•
Safeguards land to meet the needs of the City for predominantly heavier and
noisier employment uses, and in the right location for investment and
development (Chapter 2 paragraph 2.82).
3.169 They are justified:
193
•
They are needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core
Strategy. Industrial sites are included in land needed for employment and
economic development as set out in CS1’Land for Employment and
Economic Development’, which identifies the need for a 5-year supply for
manufacturing and distribution / warehousing (Use Classes B2 and B8).
•
Sites are needed to provide sites and respond to market demands for
preferred industrial and storage uses in Tinsley Park, Attercliffe/Newhall and
Parkway/Kettlebridge to deliver policies CS8 and CS9 (paragraph 3.132).
•
They are the most appropriate when considered against the reasonable
alternatives as they meet the need within the city to accommodate uses that
do not make good neighbours for more sensitive uses (paragraph 3.131).
11/02742/FUl valid until 1/9/16 and 12/03885/FUL valid until 11/3/16
- 134 -
3.170 They will be effective:
•
They are deliverable over the plan period because they are all located within
already well established industrial areas and there are no irresolvable issues
that would prevent any of these sites coming forward during the plan period
(paragraph 3.148).
3.171 They are consistent with national policy:
•
Sites are identified and safeguarded for industrial use in suitable and
sustainable locations that will help new industries to establish themselves and
existing firms to grow and prosper (NPPF paragraph 19 ‘Building a strong and
sustainable economy’). Allocation Type – Retail
Introduction
3.172 One site is proposed for allocation within Darnall Centre. This centre is located
on the intersection of main routes through the area (Staniforth Road, Main Road,
and Greenland Road). This centre is the key retail and community service centre
in Darnall, and has an important role in providing access to services. The centre
already has a diverse retail and business community reflecting local cultural
diversity, but is in need of regeneration to provide enough good quality shops,
services and facilities to meet modern local needs.
3.173 This site is allocated without required land uses, and the justification for the need
for flexibility is set out below. Allocation means that its status a development site
is taken into account in infrastructure providers plans, but the flexibility for
preferred land uses set out in the menu for the underlying policy area will apply,
see City Policies and Sites Document paragraph 12.6. The type of development
allowed on these sites is set out by table H1 in the City Policies and Sites
document. Development should be in accordance with the provisions of City
Policy J1 (b).
P00185 Station Road, Darnall
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.174 As the site is located within a District Centre, see Chapter 2 paragraphs 2.144 2.149 which detail how the policy area is consistent with national policy and the
Core Strategy.
Justification
Alternative Options
- 135 -
3.175 See Chapter 2 paragraph 2.155 which refers to choices for the District Centre.
3.176 This site could have been allocated for retail use to support the specific aims of
CS35, but this site is not well located to accommodate wholly retail uses, see
paragraph 3.180.
3.177 The proposed allocation of this site for preferred uses will allow for flexibility of
land uses that support renewal of the centre, by either providing additional new
district centre facilities to improve the local offer for residents in the Darnall and
surrounding area, or other new development that could provide support for the
centre, such as other service uses or residential. Development of this site would
contribute to overall regeneration of Darnall Centre in line with CS35 Darnall
Centre’.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.178 The site is highly accessible to the surrounding residential community. It is
approximately 100m from a bus stop on Staniforth Road for high frequency bus
route 52, and is served by other less frequent routes to the surrounding
residential community. The site has easy access to the A6102 Greenland Road
with onward easy access to the M1 motorway via J34south.
3.179 Flexibility to deliver a wider range of uses, or a mixed development is needed
because:
3.180 Access to the site is constrained, and servicing of the site for wholly retail uses
would be problematical. Access would have to be via Station Road which is a
narrow road serving residential properties and Darnall Station. Access via Prince
of Wales Road is constrained by the proximity of the junction with Main Road, and
pedestrian crossing facilities that would prevent all directions access in and out of
the site. Major improvement would also be needed to the junction of Main Road
and Station Road and would affect existing property.
3.181 The site is within the District Centre but away from the main core shopping area
around Main Road and Staniforth Road.
3.182 Major retail would have an adverse impact on the amenity of residents living on
Station Road, flexibility would allow for a scale of development that would be
more likely to be compatible with these existing uses.
3.183 There are problems that will need to be addressed and these are included as
conditions on development for this site:
•
The site will need to be cleared of existing buildings.
•
There are two existing electricity sub-station on the site that will be
prohibitively costly to relocate, development will have to accommodate
these.
- 136 -
•
Further investigation is needed for presence of underground services,
especially those that relate to the substations.
Justification for Conditions
3.184 See paragraph above.
3.185 There is a small area of flood risk on the south western edge of the site, for this
reason mitigation of flood risk will need to be incorporated into development
proposals.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.186 This is a sustainable location for District centre uses. It is close to the housing
areas it serves, and is on a high frequency bus route. Significant positive impacts
would arise from an improved physical environment and better quality facilities.
There is a small area of flood risk on the south western edge of the site; this is
dealt with by a condition on development see paragraph 3.185.
3.187 In terms of equality issues it would provide excellent employment opportunities in
a priority area, as there is very good public transport access, and many
pedestrian routes from the surrounding area to the centre. This is particularly
relevant for an area with a high concentration of Black and Minority Ethnic people
who would benefit particularly from good quality local centre facilities.
Consultee Preferences
3.188 At the Draft Plan stage St James Securities 194 supported the allocation of this site
for shops (A1) as a preferred use. However, they considered that in view of the
terms of policy CS35 (which underpins this allocation) the list of preferred uses
should be more extensive. This is accommodated by allocation of the site for
preferred uses, it will allow the full range of district centre uses to come forward
where development proposals demonstrate that they supports the aim of CS35
for regeneration of the centre.
3.189 Network Rail 195 commented that given the size of the development site, and its
proximity to Darnall Railway Station, there is opportunity to secure improvements
to facilities and access to the station. This would not be needed to enable
development of this site, but could be negotiated as part of development
proposals where it would offer improved facilities to users or occupants of new
development.
Effectiveness
194
195
Draft Plan stage: Comment ID 876
Draft Plan stage: Comment ID 452
- 137 -
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
3.190 The site will be disposed or promoted for development by the City Council. No
proposals have been identified for the site at the current time.
3.191 There is a risk that because of site constraints, see paragraph 3.180 above, or
the lack of prime retail frontage to the District Centre (as the site is located along
Station Road), this site may remain undeveloped. However, the flexibility allowed
by the policy creates an opportunity to deliver a wide range of district centre uses,
or uses that would complement the centre, guided by the criteria set out in policy
C4 ‘Development in District and Neighbourhood Centres’, but still reflecting the
Core Strategy spatial policy for Darnall as set out in CS35.
3.192 Smaller scale projects to be delivered under the Thriving Centres Initiative, (see
Chapter 2 paragraph 2.151), and funded by Local Growth Fund, include a shop
front improvement grant scheme and small scale environmental improvements
such as summer flower baskets and painting of railings, this will help to increase
confidence in the centre and may help with investor confidence in this site.
Monitoring
3.193 There is no formal monitoring of retail sites planned, however updating of a sites
database will monitor gains and losses of sites.
Conclusions on Soundness of Retail Allocation
3.194 The allocation of a site for District Centre use is considered sound for the
following reasons.
3.195 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed development requirements to support
regeneration within Darnall Centre set out in the Darnall Attercliffe and
Tinsley NDF (paragraph 2.149, and the Council’s Thriving Centres
Strategy (paragraph 2.151).
3.196 They are justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy
for regeneration within Darnall District Centre set out in policy CS35
‘Darnall District Centre’ (paragraph 2.148).
•
It is the most appropriate allocation when considered against the
reasonable alternatives as it provides a site opportunity to deliver new
facilities or uses that will support the centre (paragraph 3.169).
- 138 -
3.197 They will be effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as it is surrounded by existing district
centre uses but has flexibility to deliver a range of uses or mixed
development that will support the centre (paragraph 3.178).
3.198 They are consistent with national policy:
•
Allocation of a site within the centre boundary provides a site that can
contribute to the development needs of the centre (NPPF policy Objective
2. ‘Ensuring the vitality of town centres’).
•
It provides a sustainable and accessible site opportunity to deliver uses
that will support or complement existing business and facilities in the
District Centre (NPPF objective 8 ‘Healthy Communities’).
Allocation Type – Housing
Introduction
3.199 The sites proposed for housing in the Lower Don Valley Core Strategy area are
all within or on the fringes of the already established residential areas of Darnall.
They are all within Housing Areas on the Proposals Map.
Sites with Required Uses
3.200 These sites are allocated for required uses, Housing (C3) or residential
institutions (C2). Development should be in accordance with the provisions of City
Policy J1 (a). There are 3 sites within this category:
•
•
•
P00181
P00412
P00500
Ouse Road, Darnall
Chapelwood Road
Infield Lane
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.201 As the sites are located within a Housing Area, see Chapter 2 paragraphs 2.217 2.219, which detail how the policy area is consistent with national policy and the
Core Strategy.
3.202 P00181 Ouse Road is identified specifically within the Darnall Attercliffe and
Tinsley Neighbourhood Development Framework (DAT NDF) for housing-led
- 139 -
regeneration, see Chapter 1 paragraph 1.45. The site is part of a comprehensive
solution to broaden housing provision within Darnall as part of the Development
Framework proposals 196. In this document this site, together with the former
Kettlebridge School (a derelict Listed Building at risk), and open space at
Ouseburn Road (which is abused and neglected), form a package of sites that
together will be considered for redevelopment. This site offers a significant
regeneration opportunity within the area. This would be consistent with the aims
of CS24 ’Maximising the Use of Previously Developed Land for New Housing’
and CS28 ‘Housing in Attercliffe and Darnall’ 197. It would bring an unused and
derelict site back into use making a significant contribution to improvement of the
quality of the neighbourhood which is at present very poor.
3.203 Sites P00412 Chapelwood and P00500 Infield Lane are consistent with
proposals in the Darnall Attercliffe and Tinsley Neighbourhood Development
Framework for promotion of housing-led regeneration 198. Both sites were
identified after the publication of this document, but proposals for residential
development will be entirely in line with its objectives. They will provide an
opportunity to broaden housing provision within Darnall. This would be consistent
with the aims of CS24; it would bring unused sites back into use making a
contribution to improvement of the quality of the neighbourhood.
Justification
Alternative Options
3.204 See paragraphs Chapter 2 paragraph 2.220 which refers to choices for the
Housing Policy Area.
3.205 No alternative land use options were considered for these sites for the following
reasons:
P00181
Ouse Road
P00500
Infield Lane
P00181 is a site that has naturalised, and P00500 is partly
naturalised, P00181 having been cleared for a number of
years and P00500 being an underused and neglected
site. For both these sites there are regeneration benefits
arising from comprehensive schemes to bring forward
new housing and improve areas of neglected local open
space in line with the proposals in the DAT NDF, see
Chapter 1 paragraph 1.45. Both sites suffer from
considerable abuse from flytipping, and would benefit
from being brought into the wider residential area.
Development would bring more activity into the area
196
DAT NDF 2005 - Shown as site 8 together with sites 23 and 24 (Open Space) and site 32 (Kettlebridge
School), see document page 42
197
Core strategy pages 64 and 69
198
DAT NDF Housing Strategy, paragraph 5.3.2, page 40
- 140 -
reducing the opportunities for anti social uses to take
place. Therefore no alternative options were considered
for these sites.
P00412
Chapelwood
This site is located firmly within a well established
residential area and was formerly used for residential
care.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.206 All three sites are located close to the Darnall District centre, with a range of
shops and services including banks to serve residents at the site, this is
consistent with the provisions of policy C1 ‘Access to Local Services and
Community Facilities in New Residential Developments’ 199.
3.207 For all three sites there is an identified shortage of school places within Darnall
this would need to be addressed as part of the planning application, see also
paragraph 5.35 .
3.208 Other justification:
P00181 Ouse
Road
The site is approximately 200m from a bus stop on Staniforth
Road for high frequency bus route 52. The site has easy access
to Staniforth Rd with onward easy access to the A6102
Greenland Road or A6178 Attercliffe Road.
P00412
Chapelwood
The site has easy access to Staniforth Road, with onward easy
access to the A6102 Greenland Road or A6178 Attercliffe Road
for the City Centre.
However, the nearest high frequency bus route (number 52) is
approximately 500m walk away on Staniforth Road. For this site
public transport improvement may be needed to support
development at this site. This could be achieved via a travel
plan that sets out all transport options and indicates how public
transport deficiencies can be addressed , this would be
consistent with CS53,’Management of Demand for Travel’ and
policy E1 ‘Development and Trip Generation’.
P00500
Infield Lane
199
The site offers opportunity to significantly improve the quality of a
local environment that is particularly degraded by abuse and
City Policies and Sites, page 33
- 141 -
antisocial behaviour. Development of this area will improve the
quality and safety of vehicle access into High Hazels Park by
providing for creation of an alternative access instead of the
current access, which is via Catley Road through an industrial
estate. It will provide an improved boundary and approach to
the allotments site at Infield Lane, making them more secure,
and less of a target for abuse. It would bring an unused site
back into use, making a contribution to improvement of the
quality of the neighbourhood which is close to existing housing
at Britannia Road and Catcliffe Road. This is entirely in line with
the provisions of CS24.
The site is within 280m of a bus stop on Main Road for high
frequency bus route 52. The site has easy access to Main Road
with onward easy access to the A6102 Greenland Road. This is
consistent with the provisions of CS23 ‘Locations for New
Housing’.
Justification for Conditions
3.209 For sites P00181 Ouse Road and P00412 Chapelwood there are no conditions
identified for the site allocation.
3.210 For P00500 Infield Lane the following conditions will apply:
•
In order to maximise the opportunity to bring this housing into the wider
Darnall housing area, improved pedestrian facilities to serve High Hazels
Park and the Infield Allotments site and links to the Darnall District Centre,
should form part of development proposals.
•
The current boundary to High Hazels Park is a makeshift boundary formed
by previous land uses at the edge of Infield Lane, development at this site
should incorporate improved boundary treatment to the park.
•
The Carr Brook, which is culverted through the site, is classified as a river
and access for maintenance is required, development should be set back
3m to allow for access.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.211 For all three sites the sustainability and equality appraisals show that they are
sustainable for residential use, being well located within walking distance of local
facilities, where development will make efficient use of a previously developed
site, and provide an opportunity to improve the built environment. For P00500
Infield Lane, it provides an opportunity to improve the built environment and the
boundary and approach to High Hazels Park.
- 142 -
3.212 P00181 Ouse Road and P00500 Infield Lane have good access by public
transport, but P00412 Chapelwood is not close to the District Centre and high
frequency bus routes, which would impact on those without personal transport,
and could particularly affect some groups with low car ownership. Mitigation
measures could explore improvement of public transport routes, and timings via
Darnall centre to this site, to encourage users to use public transport as part of a
viable travel plan. Pedestrian routes toward district centre and main bus routes
could be made more attractive to encourage use, see also paragraph 3.210.
Consultee Preferences
3.213 Comments are outlined below.
P00181
Ouse Road
At the Emerging Options stage there was one objection to
the allocation of this site, as it is a Greenfield site200, see
paragraph 3.205.
P00412
Chapelwood
No comments have been made about this allocation.
P00500
Infield Lane
The inclusion of the site was requested by the landowners at
the Preferred Options consultation July 2010, to help in
supporting the delivery of this site for new housing 201.
At the Additional sites consultation comments on this
allocation included 202:
•
A local resident who was concerned that the access
arrangements were not made clear. The Highways
Agency referred to the implications for the national
road network arising from cumulation of development
in the Lower Don Valley; this is dealt with as part of
the planning application see 12/03042/FUL.
•
The Environment Agency raised the issue of the Carr
Brook; this is dealt with by a condition on development
see paragraph 3.210.
•
Natural England supported the conditions on
development.
200
DLP Comment ID 4970.028
Preferred options: Comment ID 349, Proposals Map Comment ID 90
202
Local resident ASAO327; Environment Agency ASAO412; Highways Agency ASAO 516; Natural
England ASAO606
201
- 143 -
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
3.214 P00181 Ouse Road and P00412 Chapelwood are identified in the Sheffield
Housing Land Availability Study as suitable for housing that could be completed
after 2017/18 203; this would support the provisions of CS23. P00500 Infield Lane
is identified as suitable for housing that could be completed by 2025/6 204.
However, as this site now has the benefit of planning consent this is an example
of a site that could be brought forward earlier in the plan period.
3.215 P00181 and P00412 will be brought forward for development or promoted by the
City Council. No specific proposals have been brought forward at the present
time. A local housing association is interested in delivering affordable family
housing at P00412, and is preparing a bid for Homes and Community Agency
funding for a start on site by Match 2015, however it is unlikely this would go
ahead unless the bid is successful. There is a risk that landowners may continue
to delay development whilst waiting for a more favourable housing market. If
more flexibility were allowed for alternative land uses to come forward it would
affect the ability to deliver the overall requirement to deliver new housing as set
out in policy CS22 ‘Scale of Requirement for New Housing’. Safeguarding these
sites for new housing, even if delivery is delayed, is still necessary to deliver the
required regeneration in these areas.
3.216 P00500 Infield Lane will be brought forward for development or promoted by the
landowners. There are no current plans to deliver this site, and it could be
delayed by the current slow housing market. However, the site has planning
consent 205 which will expire in 2016 so development could reasonably be
expected within this timeframe.
Monitoring
3.217 Monitoring will be done through Sheffield Housing Land Availability Assessment
(SHLAA) and the Development Management process.
Sites without Required Uses
3.218 One site is allocated without required land uses. Allocation means that its status
as a development site is taken into account in infrastructure providers plans, but
the flexibility for preferred land uses set out in the menu for the underlying policy
area will apply, see City Policies and Sites Document paragraph 12.6. The type
of development allowed on these sites is set out by table H1 in the City Policies
203
Site reference S00695
Site reference S01443
205
12/04042/FUL
204
- 144 -
and Sites document. Development should be in accordance with the provisions of
City Policy J1 (b).
P00196 Attercliffe Canalside, Staniforth Road Depot, Staniforth Road
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.219 As the site is located within a Housing Area, see Chapter 2 paragraph 2.2172.219 which details how the policy area is consistent with national policy and the
Core Strategy.
3.220 The site is identified within the Darnall Attercliffe and Tinsley Neighbourhood
Development Framework (DAT NDF) for housing-led regeneration, see Chapter 1
paragraph 1.45. The site is part of a comprehensive solution to broaden housing
provision within Darnall as part of the Development Framework proposals.
Justification
Alternative Options
3.221 See paragraphs Chapter 2 paragraph 2.220 which refer to choices for the
Housing Policy Area.
3.222 This site allocation is one of a collection of sites located together around the
canal at Attercliffe. The sites are known together as Attercliffe Canalside. The
reasons for allocation of these sites is set out at the listing under Flexible Use
allocations, see sites P00134, P00154, P00184, P00194, P00195, & P00202
from paragraph 3.263 .
3.223 This site is separated out in this document as it is situated within a Housing Area,
rather than a Flexible Use Area, this reflects the fact that it is located close to a
long established residential area at the western end of the existing Darnall
housing area.
3.224 The location of this site, in between the Flexible Use sites around the canal at
Attercliffe, and the well established Darnall residential area, is a key factor; it
means that this site can offer a significant opportunity to link together the
regeneration initiatives within Darnall with those in Attercliffe, as promoted in the
Darnall Attercliffe and Tinsley NDF 206. This is consistent with CS28 ‘Housing in
Attercliffe and Darnall’ which promotes housing as part of the mix of uses in this
location.
3.225 The site was proposed for allocation for housing as a required use at the
Preferred Options stage, but this has now been reviewed. As the proposals for
significant housing development in the wider Lower Don Valley have progressed,
in particular the outline planning consents that include housing development at
206
Paragraph 5.50, page 50
- 145 -
River Don District (see listing for P00127 paragraph 3.43), the Waverley New
Community proposal close to the Sheffield border with Rotherham, which may
displace Sheffield schoolchildren from Rotherham schools 207 , together with the
other proposed housing site allocations in this document, then a site could be
needed, in the long term, to deliver a new school.
3.226 Alternatively, as set out in the reasons for the allocation for the Attercliffe
Canalside sites, this site could make an important contribution to housing
regeneration objectives in Darnall. For these reasons the site has been allocated
for preferred uses, which will allow flexibility for a new school should it come
forward during the plan period.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.227 The site is adjacent to a bus stop on Staniforth Road for high frequency bus route
52, and is located approximately 300m from the tram stop at Woodbourn Road.
The site has easy access to Staniforth Road, with onward easy access to the
A6178 Attercliffe Road. This site is particularly well located within the Lower Don
Valley to deliver a new secondary school; it is situated on good transport links
and close to good sports facilities in the central part of the valley. However, as it
is yet to be determined whether there is a demand for a school as a result of new
housing development, allocation for this purpose would not be appropriate. The
proposed allocation without required uses will retain some flexibility for other land
uses to come forward including a use for the community if required.
3.228 The site is consistent with policy C1 ’Access to Local Services and Community
Facilities in New Residential Developments’, and has access to a range of local
services and community facilities at the Attercliffe Centre, along Staniforth Road,
and at Darnall District Centre.
3.229 There are problems to be addressed at this site:
207
•
The existing depot functions will need to be satisfactorily relocated and
existing buildings demolished. A remediation strategy to address any
contamination of the site from past industrial use of this site will need to
form part of planning application.
•
The Sheffield Energy and Water Study highlighted an infrastructure
constraint that will need to be investigated further. It has been identified
that a 33kV cable clips the northern corner of the site, but only a small area
of the site is affected, as these can be very expensive to divert and for this
site it would be difficult to find an appropriate diversion route, it is
recommended that any development proposals are designed to
accommodate the existing cable, an easement may be required for
necessary maintenance access.
www.rido.org.uk/rido-news/major-developments/waverley-development
- 146 -
Justification for Conditions
3.230 There are no conditions on development required for this site.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.231 This site is sustainable for residential use providing a contribution to a range and
choice of housing in the Lower Don Valley. The site is very accessible, located on
a high frequency bus route which links it to Darnall District Centre for everyday
facilities such as shops, health facilities, and primary schools, and is close to
Supertram at Woodbourn Road. In terms of equality issues this would greatly
benefit young people, disabled people and residents without access to a car.
Consultee Preferences
3.232 At the Emerging Option stage DLP 208 objected to the allocation of this site for
housing, in their view the site should be allocated for a range of uses, alternative
options are discussed at paragraph 3.221.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
3.233 The site is identified in the Sheffield Housing Land Availability Study as suitable
for housing that could be completed after 2017/18 209; this would support the
provisions of CS23 ‘Locations for New Housing'
3.234 The site will be brought forward for development or promoted by the City Council,
(see also delivery section of Attercliffe Canalside sites which applies to this site,
at paragraph 3.289). No plans for development have been identified at this
stage.
3.235 The main risk for this site is that the transport depot will not be relocated, and the
site then becomes unavailable as a development site. However, there is no
evidence to suggest that if a suitable relocation option became available and
viable, the depot could not be relocated; there is no specific reason why the depot
has to be in this location.
Monitoring
3.236 See paragraph 3.217
Conclusions on Soundness of Housing Allocations
3.237 The allocation of sites for Housing is considered sound for the following reasons.
208
209
EO Comment ID 4970.020
Site reference S00696
- 147 -
3.238 They are positively prepared:
•
They meet objectively assessed development requirements for new
housing and regeneration needs set out in the Darnall Attercliffe and
Tinsley NDF see paragraph from 3.202.and 3.220
3.239 They are justified:
•
They are needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core
Strategy; specifically policies CS23 and CS28 (paragraph 2.218).
•
They are the most appropriate to provide new housing given that these are
sustainable and accessible site opportunities within an existing stable
residential area with little potential for change (paragraph 3.205 and
3.222).
3.240 They will be effective:
•
They are deliverable over the plan period as they are located within
existing housing areas and there are no irresolvable constraints to prevent
delivery (paragraph 3.214 – 216 and 3.233 - 235).
•
If site P00196 is needed to deliver a new school the flexible allocation
allows for this (paragraph 3.227).
3.241 They are consistent with national policy:
•
Housing allocations specifically provide site opportunity to deliver a wide
choice of high quality homes (NPPF Core Planning Principle 6).
Allocation Type – Waste Management
Introduction
3.242 A Waste Management Policy Area is proposed at Bernard Road (the site of the
incinerator), and at the adjacent Lumley Street. It is proposed to allocate a site at
Lumley Street that will support the delivery of the City’s policies on waste
management.
3.243 This site is allocated for required land uses, waste management facilities and
ancillary uses (excluding landfill and open windrow composting). Development
should be in accordance with the provisions of City Policy J1 (a).
P00141 Broadlands, Lumley Street
National Policy and Other Strategies
- 148 -
3.244 As the site is located within Waste Management Area, see Chapter 2 paragraphs
2.263 - 2.66 which detail how the policy area is consistent with national policy and
the Core Strategy,
Justification
Alternative Options
3.245 See Chapter 2 paragraph 2.269 which refer to choices for the Waste
Management Area. The site is located near to the Bernard Road incinerator plant
and existing depot facilities for the city’s waste contractor, and it is therefore
consistent with Core Strategy policy CS69 ‘Safeguarding Major Waste
Facilities 210’.
3.246 The site is located within an established industrial area, and allocation for industry
was considered for this site. However, given the location of the site, it is ideally
placed to help deliver waste management objectives set out in CS68 ‘Waste
Development Objectives 211’, and the City’s Waste Management Strategy, see
delivery at paragraph 3.255.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.247 The allocation supports the Council’s approved Waste Strategy which sets out
how waste in Sheffield will be managed until 2020 212. Some of the site is already
used as a depot for refuse collection vehicles used by the Council’s waste
contractor, and the vacant portion of the site adjoins the City’s energy recovery
facility.
3.248 The site is located close to the A57 Parkway via Bernard Road, giving good
transport connections around the city, and to the M1 motorway. This would
minimise the distance that collected waste needs to travel.
3.249 For employees based at the site, the SYPTE Land Use Integration Study scores
this site as green, public transport intervention would not be needed to bring this
site forward. The site is approximately 500m from a bus stop on high frequency
routes 52, and within 500m of the Nunnery Square tram stop.
3.250 The Sheffield Energy and Water Study has highlighted an infrastructure constraint
for this site. It has identified that a section of public sewer is recorded as crossing
the site. A protected strip width of between 6 and 12 metres across this area may
be needed unless it can be demonstrated that the network can be reasonably
diverted or relocated, this should be accommodated as part of any proposed
scheme.
210
Core Strategy, page 124
Core Strategy, page 122
212
www.sheffield.gov.uk/environment/waste/strategy.html
211
- 149 -
Justification for Conditions
3.251 The site layout should retain or replace existing landscaping fronting Lumley
Street. This is an existing banking of mature landscaping which acts as a screen
to uses that may be carried out on this site.
3.252 Measures to ensure that additional surface water run-off does not increase the
risk of flooding to adjacent sites will be needed. Levels on part of the site have
already been raised to form a development plateau, but additional measures in
line with CS67 ‘Flood Risk Management’ may be needed.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.253 The sustainability and equality appraisals recorded positive impacts for waste
management uses here. The site is a previously developed site, well located
close to good public transport routes. It is also located close to other waste
transfer uses, and therefore co-location opportunities may arise.
Consultee Preferences
3.254 The landowner has commented the policy designation and allocation of this site is
acceptable to them, as parts of the site are already in a similar use anyway.
Effectiveness
Delivery
3.255 The Council’s Waste Contractor will build and operate the facility as part of a
long-term waste management contract. The site is vacant and available for this
use. Part of the site is already in use as an extension to the adjacent waste
management vehicle depot.
Flexibility and Risk
3.256 There is a risk that the site may not be needed for waste management uses, and
the allocation would hold back alternative land uses. However, the revised waste
directive 213 which came into force in 2011 places requirements to deal with waste
in the following priority order: prevention; preparing for re-use; recycling; other
recovery (for example, energy recovery); disposal. Changes are being phased in,
and some of the changes do not need to be in place until the end of 2015, in
particular the need to segregate certain waste and keep them separate. This site
is likely to be needed to meet this requirement.
213
Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011
- 150 -
Monitoring
3.257 There is no formal monitoring of this site planned, however updating of a sites
database will monitor gains and losses of sites.
Conclusions on Soundness of Waste Management Allocation
3.258 The allocation of a site for waste management use is considered sound for the
following reasons.
3.259 It is positively prepared:
•
It creates an opportunity to deliver the requirements set out in the
Municipal Waste Management Strategy for additional waste facilities
needed to support the Council’s Waste Management Service (paragraph
2.266).
3.260 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver policies CS69’Safeguarding Major Waste Facilities’
and F2 ‘Requirements for Waste Management’.
•
Its location close to the incinerator, and to other waste management uses
and depots, makes it the most appropriate use of this site when
considered against the reasonable alternatives.
3.261 It will be effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period in line with the requirements for
additional waste management facilities in the Council’s Waste
Management Strategy.
3.262 It is consistent with national policy:
•
It will contribute to national objectives for waste (to produce less and use it
as a resource); by providing an opportunity site to expand the City’s
recycling activities (PPS10 Sustainable Waste Management’).
•
It provides a site opportunity to deliver associated infrastructure to support
delivery of renewable and low carbon energy, as the site is next to the city
incinerator and close to existing waste management uses at Lumley Street
(NPPF Objective 10).
Allocation Type – Flexible Use
Introduction
3.263 The sites proposed for allocation within Flexible Use areas all fall within the
‘without required uses’ category. The sites are all located within a Housing
- 151 -
Regeneration Area within the area of the Darnall Attercliffe and Tinsley
Neighbourhood Development Framework, see Chapter 1 paragraph 1.45). This
is a housing led regeneration strategy, where flexibility to deliver a range of land
uses will assist regeneration of these former industrial sites in line with this
framework and with Core Strategy objectives.
3.264 These sites are allocated without required land uses, and the justification for the
need for flexibility is set out in the listing. Allocation means that their status as
development sites is taken into account in infrastructure providers plans, but the
flexibility for preferred land uses set out in the menu for the underlying policy area
will apply, see City Policies and Sites Document paragraph 12.6. The type of
development allowed on these sites is set out by table H1 in the City Policies and
Sites document. Development should be in accordance with the provisions of City
Policy J1 (b). There are 8 sites within this category.
3.265 The first seven sites form a collection of sites located close together around and
along the canal at Attercliffe.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
P00134
P00154
P00183
P00184
P00194
P00195
P00202
Attercliffe Canalside, Ripon Street/Woodbourn Road
Fitzalan Works, Effingham Street
PIC Toys, off Darnall Road
Pinfold Works, Staniforth Road
Site adjacent Fitzalan Works, Attercliffe Road
Spartan Works, Attercliffe Road
Westaways, Off Ripon Street
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.266 All these sites are located within a Flexible Use Area; see Chapter 2 paragraphs
2.237 - 2.241 which detail how the policy area is consistent with national policy
and the Core Strategy.
3.267 The Lower Don Valley Masterplan and Vision, see Chapter 1 paragraph 1.40
contains an Illustrative masterplan that promotes the area around the canal at
Attercliffe as a new housing location 214. All of these sites are within the area
covered by the Darnall, Attercliffe and Tinsley Neighbourhood Development
Framework, see paragraph 1.45, which identifies the area around the canal as
having the potential to make a significant contribution to HMR objectives of
broadening the range and choice of new housing. These allocations would
therefore be in line with policies CS23 ‘Locations for New Housing’ and CS28
‘Housing in Attercliffe and Darnall’.
214
See Darnall Attercliffe and Tinsley, NDF chapter 6.1
- 152 -
Justification
Alternative Options
3.268 See Chapter 2 paragraphs 2.244 - 2.249 which refer to choices for the Flexible
Use Policy Areas. Within Flexible Use areas there are no preferred uses (see
policy H1), all these sites are allocated, therefore, without required uses.
3.269 All of these sites are situated within an area undergoing transition from a run
down, but long established industrial area, to a mixed use area where housing
and new employment uses can operate side by side. All the sites would benefit
from regeneration as the land is either vacant or in declining industrial use.
3.270 One choice for these sites could be to allocate them for housing, however not all
parts of this area around the canal would be suitable for housing development,
especially on its western edges close to existing and thriving industrial uses. The
results of masterplanning work and other studies has been used to guide the
direction of the Core Strategy policy for Attercliffe and Darnall (CS28). They all
concluded that the future for these sites should be through housing led
regeneration. The best way to enable the regeneration of the area is to allow for
maximum flexibility, with an emphasis on bringing housing forward where
possible. This is why the area is shown as a Flexible Use Area.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.271 Sites to the north of the canal (sites P00154 Fitzalan Works, P00194 adj
Fitzalan Works and P00195 Spartan Works) and the southern end of site
P00134 Ripon Street, closest to the remaining industrial area at Worthing Road,
would benefit from inclusion of employment uses, to act as a buffer area to
existing industry to the north and west of the sites. This would be supported by
the Sheffield Employment Sites Survey which identifies P00134 and P00154 as
available sites. These sites could be brought forward for employment uses.
3.272 Sites P00184 Pinfold Works, P00202 Westaways and the majority of site
P00134 Ripon Street would be expected to come forward for primarily residential
uses. The sites are all close to existing Housing areas in Darnall.
3.273 Site P00183 Pic Toys is located further from existing housing at the edge of the
Business and Industry area around Tinsley Park Road; but the vision in the
masterplans and Core Strategy is to extend this transition area along the length
of the canal around Attercliffe, and delivery of this site for housing could be
towards the end of the plan period.
3.274 CS24 ‘Maximising the Use of Previously Developed Land for New Housing’ will
be relevant for P00134 Ripon Street, as this site is a former recreation ground,
and is a Greenfield site. This site though is a key part of a comprehensive
regeneration strategy promoted in the NDF and the driver for policy CS28. To
make a transformational regeneration change around the canal, it is necessary to
- 153 -
bring all these sites around the canal forward for new land uses, and this would
be in accordance with part (a.) of the policy.
3.275 The Sheffield Housing Land Availability Study identifies most of these sites as
identified opportunity sites that are suitable for housing that could be completed
by 2025/6 215 . With P00184 Pinfold Works being allocated the same, but after
2025/6. This would be in line with policy CS23 and CS28.
3.276 All these sites are located within 300m of a high frequency bus route on
Staniforth Road (route 52), or tram stop at Woodbourn Road. The sites are
located close to the A6178 (Attercliffe Road) with easy access to the M1
motorway to Junction 34south.
3.277 All the sites are consistent with policy C1 ‘Access to Local Services and
Community Facilities in New Residential Developments’ and have access to a
range of local services and community facilities at the Attercliffe Centre, along
Staniforth Road, and at Darnall District Centre.
3.278 There are some issues to be addressed to enable the sites to come forward for
development, these are:
P00194 adj to
Fitzalan Works
P00184 Pinfold
Works
P00195
Spartan Works.
P00183 Pic
Toys
P00134 Ripon
Street,
P00183 Pic
Toys
P00202
Westaways
Some site clearance will be required
A small area to the west of the site within a flood risk area,
see paragraph 3.16. Any proposals for housing
development should avoid the area affected and mitigation of
flood risk, including flood protection measures and design for
resilience to flooding will be needed as part of development
proposals.
The Sheffield Energy and Water Study has highlighted an
infrastructure constraint that will need to be addressed
before these sites are delivered.
•
For P00134 Yorkshire Water have identified that a
section of combined sewer is recorded as crossing the
site. A stand-off distance of 10 metres is required at each
side of the sewer, this may reduce the developable area
of the site, unless it can be demonstrated that the
network can be reasonably diverted or relocated. Further
investigation of this is advised.
215
Sheffield and Rotherham Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, March 2012 update, site
references S00768, S00769. S00774, S00777, S00775, S00772, S00778
- 154 -
•
For P00183 the high level asset plans provided by YEDL
identify a 132kV overhead cable crossing part of the site.
This type of cable is expensive to divert and as it affects
only a small portion of the site, it is recommended that
development proposals are designed to accommodate
the cables, and an easement may be needed to provide
for necessary access for maintenance.
•
For site P00202 Yorkshire Water have identified that a
section of public sewer is recorded as crossing the site. A
stand-off distance of between 3 and 6 metres is required
at each side of the sewer and this may reduce the
developable area of the site. It is recommended that any
proposed layout of the site incorporates the sewer
easement to optimise the developable area of the site as
a diversion route is considered unlikely to be practical in
terms of the hydraulic performance of this sewer.
Justification for Conditions
3.279 Sites P00134 Ripon Street, P00183 Pic Toys, P00184Pinfold Works and
P00194 adj Fitzalan Works do not have any conditions on development listed.
3.280 P00154 Fitzalan Works and P00202 Westaways both include a requirement for
development to safeguard the setting of the nearby Baltic Works, which is a listed
building.
3.281 P00195 Spartan Works includes a requirement to retain the frontage buildings.
This building is not listed, but presents a very attractive frontage to Attercliffe
Road, and the building is of some local historic importance, being formerly a
prominent local steelworks building. P00195 also has a requirement to safeguard
the setting of the Yorkshire Bank building on the Attercliffe road frontage, as this
is a listed building.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.282 These sites are generally sustainable for residential use, providing opportunity for
a contribution to a range and choice of housing in the Lower Don Valley, and
other facilities that contribute toward a new mixed community.
3.283 All of the sites except P00183 Pic Toys are all very accessible, located close to
the Attercliffe Neighbourhood Centre, and on a high frequency bus route, which
links them to Darnall District Centre for everyday facilities, and to Supertram at
Woodbourn Road. Site P00183 is closer to the Attercliffe Tram stop, for this site
a travel plan should address the routes between this site and public transport,
see policy E1’Development and Trip Generation’. In terms of equality issues, this
accessibility would benefit young people, disabled people, and residents without
access to a car.
- 155 -
3.284 Site P00183 also has a small area to the west of site within a flood risk area, this
is covered by a condition on development, see paragraph 3.278.
Consultee Preferences
3.285 At the Emerging Options stage some landowners of these sites made
representations that, in their view, these sites were not suitable for housing led
regeneration and more suitable for industrial uses or uses to support the
Attercliffe Centre 216. One landowner did support the Flexible Use policy area and
asked that his site be added to the list of site allocations (P00194 adj Fitzalan
Works).
3.286 At the Preferred Options and Draft Plan consultation stage, the landowners of
these sites made representations to support the location of their sites within a
Flexible Use designation on the proposals map 217. In their view this maintains the
opportunity for a variety of new uses to come forward in this regeneration area.
3.287 At the Draft stage, English Heritage asked for references to be made to the
nearby locations of listed buildings at sites P00154 Fitzalan Works, P00195
Spartan Works and P00202 Westaways 218. This was added as a condition on
development at these sites, see paragraphs 3.280 – 281.
3.288 At the draft stage the Environment Agency referred to the flood risk at site
P00183 Pic Toys 219, see paragraph 3.278.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
3.289 The sites will be brought forward together for development, or promoted by the
landowners, as part of comprehensive regeneration of the Attercliffe Canalside,
area in line with the outline proposals in the Darnall Attercliffe and Tinsley
Neighbourhood Development Framework.
3.290 A joint landowner and City Council study was undertaken in 2007 to evaluate the
viability of housing led regeneration across the Attercliffe Waterside sites, and
identify development options across the sites. Whilst no plans for development
have been identified for any of these sites at this stage, landowners continue to
work together to identify viable schemes. Over the seven sites there is a risk that
landowners may continue to delay development whilst waiting for a more
favourable housing market, or that multiple landowners could fail to agree on site
216
Emerging options Comment ID’s : P00134 DLP 4970.027; P00154 Duke of Norfolk 4970.032 &
5202.01; P00154 DLP 4970.031; P00194 Dyson 5202.01 & 5202.005; P00195 DLP 4970.033
217
Preferred Options Comment ID’s; P00154 Duke of Norfolk 769; All sites BWB 1438 &1446; P00154
Duke of Norfolk 1193 (p/map); P00194 Commercial Estates 2057 (p/map)
Draft Plan stage: P00134 BWB 174; P00154 BWB 175; P00184 BWB 176; P00194 BWB 177; P00195
BWB 178, P00202 BWB 179
218
English Heritage Comment ID’s767, 768 & 769
219
Environment Agency Comment ID 811
- 156 -
delivery. Further work, including a remediation strategy, will need to be
commissioned to further develop a strategy to deliver these sites, and add detail
to previous masterplanning work in this area.
3.291 Due to the scale of the area, it is likely that they will be delivered in phases. 3.292 The identity and confidence for this area to become a new housing area has yet
to be developed, and a risk will need to be taken by the first developer to build in
this area. Having a fully flexible policy to encourage schemes that may have a
wider appeal to investors than pure housing developments may be the
springboard for regeneration in this area.
Monitoring
3.293 Monitoring will be done through Sheffield Housing Land Availability Assessment
(SHLAA) and the Development Management process.
P00131 Darnall Works
3.294 This is a former industrial site, where the main user has now relocated. It has a
number of industrial buildings on site which are of historic importance.
National Policy and Other Strategies
3.295 See paragraphs 3.266 for Flexible Use sites.
Justification
Alternative Options
3.296 One choice for this site would be to allocate for housing, however as not all of this
site is suitable for housing development, see below, it is unlikely that this site
could deliver the allocation requirements set out in policy H1 for 80% of the site.
3.297 The most likely uses for the site given its location at the edge of the Darnall
housing area will be a mix of housing on the western part of the site, with
employment uses that are compatible with housing locating mainly on the eastern
part of the site, utilising the listed buildings.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.298 The site is a sensitive site of historic importance with a mixture of former industrial
use, a scheduled ancient monument, listed buildings and buried archaeology.
Whilst the areas of former modern industrial uses are likely to be suitable for
housing development in line with the Flexible Use policy, it is unlikely that the
older and sensitive parts of the site would be suitable, or viable, for residential
conversions. The preference of English Heritage is that, as far as possible, this
site retains its former industrial character.
- 157 -
3.299 The site is included in the Sheffield Housing Land Availability Study, where this
site identified as an opportunity site, suitable for housing that could be
developable by 2025/6 220 and this would be in line with policy CS23 ‘Locations for
New Housing’ and CS28 ‘Housing in Attercliffe and Darnall’.
3.300 This site is situated within an area undergoing transition from a run down, but
long established, industrial area to a mixed use area where housing and new
employment uses can operate side by side. The last industrial occupier of the site
has now vacated, and the site will benefit from regeneration and introduction of
new land uses that is promoted by the masterplans for the area, and the Core
Strategy (CS28).
3.301 The site is located with access to Darnall Road onward to the A6178 (Attercliffe
Road), with easy access to the M1 motorway to J34south. The site is located
within 300m of a high frequency bus route on Staniforth Road (route 52) and tram
stop at Attercliffe.
3.302 The site is consistent with policy C1 ‘Access to Local Services and Community
Facilities in New Residential Developments’, and has access to a range of local
services and community facilities, at the Attercliffe Centre, along Staniforth Road,
and at Darnall District Centre.
3.303 There are some problems to be addressed and these are added as conditions on
development for this site they include :
•
a small part of site has high and medium risk of flood, see paragraph 3.16,
•
part of site is close to a live railway line,
•
The site has highly important archaeological and historic remains including
a scheduled ancient monument.
Justification for Conditions
3.304 Any development proposals will need to address and incorporate the importance
of the historic features on this site, see delivery paragraph 3.312.
3.305 A small part of the northern edge of this site, along the Kirkbridge Dike, is within a
medium flood risk zone. Development proposals at this site will be required to
show mitigation of flood risk and any flood protection measures as part of a
planning application, and any schemes should be designed for resilience to
flooding for any uses proposed at this site. This is consistent with policy CS67’
Flood Risk Management’.
3.306 As the Kirkbridge Dike is classified as a main river, access will be needed for
maintenance, so development will need to be set back and accommodate this
requirement.
220
Sheffield and Rotherham SHLAA March 2012 update: site reference S00776
- 158 -
3.307 The site is close to a live main railway on its western edge, safety measures may
need to be incorporated into development proposal to protect the line.
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.308 This site is generally sustainable for residential use, providing opportunity for a
contribution to a range and choice of housing in the Lower Don Valley. The site
is very accessible, located close to on a high frequency bus route which links it to
Darnall District Centre, and to Supertram at Attercliffe. In terms of equality
issues, this accessibility would benefit young people, disabled people, and
residents without access to a car.
3.309 The site has a small area within a flood risk area, and the whole site is of
significant historic importance, these issues will need to be sensitively addressed
as part of the planning application process, this is covered by a condition on
development, see paragraph 3.305.
Consultee Preferences
3.310 At the Draft City Policies and Sites consultation stage, English Heritage asked for
the allocation of this site to make clear the opportunities for new uses, and to set
out the need to safeguard the very important heritage of the site 221. They
supported the allocation at the additional options stage.
3.311 At the additional Sites consultation the following comments were made:
•
The allocation was supported by agents acting for one of the
landowners 222, but there was concern that too many conditions on
development would affect the viability of the site. They refer to the need
for the support of English Heritage, given its historical importance. Another
landowner supports the allocation, provided all landowners come together.
English Heritage has been involved in developing this site allocation, and
in production of supporting informal planning guidance, see paragraph
3.313. There is overwhelming evidence that the conditions are needed to
protect the sensitivity and importance of this site. See also paragraph
3.298.
•
The Environment Agency raised the issue of the flood risk, and Kirkbridge
Dike. Network Rail requested safety measures for the railway 223. These
are accommodated in the conditions on development.
•
Issues regarding wildlife and ecology around the canal, were raised by the
Wildlife Trust, and a need for bat survey by Peter Embleton 224 As the
canal is designated as a site of importance for nature on the Proposals
221
Draft stage: Proposals Map Comment ID182, & ASAO 446
Tatlow Stancer Comment ID’s ASAO 320, Mayflower Land Holdings ASAO 717
223
ASAO416, & ASAO449
224
ASAO 584, ASAO 32
222
- 159 -
Map, any development adjacent would need to comply with policy G1
‘Safeguarding and Enhancing Biodiversity and Features of Geological
Importance’ which safeguards and protects these areas for their wildlife
value. Surveying the old buildings for bats would be required as part of
evidence supporting a planning application.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
3.312 The site will be brought forward together for development, or promoted by the
landowners as part of comprehensive regeneration of the whole site.
3.313 Whilst no plans for development have been identified at this stage, informal
planning guidance that covers the issues and constraints at this site and makes
some recommendations on how best to bring the site forward has been prepared
by the Council 225. This was prepared with the assistance of English Heritage, and
the support of the landowners. This guidance will be used to promote the site to
future developers and guide development proposals.
3.314 The significant and complex constraints at this site, as reported above, present a
considerable risk that suitable development, that respects the importance of this
site could be brought forward. It is expected that the informal planning guidance
prepared for this site will inform proposals at an early stage, and help to reduce
risk. This, however, relies on the separate landowners working towards a
common vision.
Monitoring
3.315 See paragraph 3.293.
Conclusions on Soundness of Flexible Use Allocations
3.316 The allocation of sites for Flexible Use is considered sound for the following
reasons.
3.317 They are positively prepared:
•
They meet objectively assessed development requirements to deliver
regeneration objectives set out in the Darnall Attercliffe and Tinsley NDF
and Lower Don Valley Masterplan and Vision (paragraph 3.267).
3.318 They are justified:
•
They are needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core
Strategy, specifically policy CS28 ‘Housing in Attercliffe and Darnall’ to
225
Darnall Works Informal Planning Guidance, May 2012. A copy is available from Forward and Area
Planning Team.
- 160 -
deliver a vibrant and sustainable new residential community to the area
around the canal at Attercliffe and Darnall (paragraph 2.240).
•
They are the most appropriate to secure regeneration when considered
against the reasonable alternatives, as they provide flexibility for a mix of
uses on sites where wholly housing use may not be appropriate for
environmental reasons (paragraph from 3.271 and 3.298).
3.319 They will be effective:
•
Sites are located in an identified regeneration area around the canal where
housing is expected to be the key regeneration driver.
•
There are no irresolvable constraints that would indicate that these sites
could not be not delivered over the plan period, preliminary work has been
done to advise on efficient delivery (paragraph 3.289 and 3.312).
3.320 They are consistent with national policy:
• Sites are identified that have potential to deliver a mix of housing and other
compatible use, consistent with NPPF paragraph 17, which promotes
mixed uses on land where it can bring multiple benefit, in this case area
regeneration.
• Promotion of housing led regeneration will contribute to the national
objective to deliver a wider choice of new homes (NPPF Core Planning
Principle 6).
Transport Proposal
Tinsley Link
3.321 At present the highway network in the Lower Don Valley, particularly in the
vicinity of the M1 motorway and its junctions, operates at capacity at peak
periods, and is unable to accommodate significant additional trips. This is a view
shared by both the Council in its capacity as Highway Authority, and the
Highways Agency who manage the strategic motorway network. A new section
of public highway is proposed to support the economic objectives of the Core
Strategy, and address local environmental and congestion problems caused by
traffic on unsuitable routes. The new road is shown on the Proposals Map as a
Transport Proposal and is called the Tinsley Link.
3.322 The Tinsley Link is part of a major public transport project which connects the
centres of Rotherham and Sheffield through the Lower Don Valley. The project is
known as the Bus Rapid Transit Northern Route (BRT North). The new road has
planning consent, see paragraph 3.342.
- 161 -
3.323 The road will travel from a new junction with Meadowhall Way at the Western
end. A new bridge will carry the road over the River Don eastwards, crossing the
existing Supertram tracks at grade, before passing beneath the motorway
viaduct. It then crosses the southern edge of the E.ON biomass plant site. A
new bridge structure then carries the Tinsley Link over the live network rail line,
across the River Don, south across the Vantage Riverside development site, and
exits onto Sheffield Rd.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
3.324 The Tinsley Link is consistent with National policy as follows:
3.325 Paragraph 17 of the NPPF sets out the core land-use planning principles that
should under-pin both plan-making and decision-taking. These include the
principles that planning should:
• Proactively drive and support sustainable economic growth to deliver the
homes, businesses, industrial units and infrastructure that the country needs;
• Actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public
transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations
which are or can be made sustainable.
3.326 Section 1: Building a strong competitive economy, paragraphs 19-21. Together
these paragraphs state that ‘Planning should operate to encourage and not act as
an impediment to sustainable growth, Local Authorities should plan proactively to
meet development needs, and planning policies should recognise and seek to
address potential barriers to investment, including a poor environment, or any
lack of infrastructure, services or housing’. BRT North represents proactive
planning in line with the above, to help achieve economic growth, and meet the
development needs of business in the Lower Don Valley. Showing the BRT route
and a proposal to deliver the Tinsley Link on the proposals map will support the
delivery of development sites, and hence economic growth.
3.327 Section 4: Promoting Sustainable Transport. Paragraph 31 of the NPPF
encourages local authorities to work with neighbouring authorities and transport
providers to develop strategies for the provision of viable infrastructure necessary
to support sustainable development, including large scale facilities. Paragraph 35
requires that plans should protect and exploit opportunities for the use of
sustainable transport modes, and support developments where they will have
access to high quality public transport facilities. The BRT (north) scheme will
deliver integrated, cross-boundary infrastructure, providing high quality,
sustainable access to key development sites within Rotherham and Sheffield.
The scheme also represents a solution which will enable reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions through modal shift, and reduce congestion.
- 162 -
3.328 Section 10: Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal
change. Paragraphs 94 and 95 of the NPPF make the point that local planning
authorities should adopt proactive strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate
change and minimise vulnerability. In doing so, and in supporting the move to a
low carbon future, local planning authorities should plan for new development in
locations and ways which reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Bus Rapid
Transit North route is located in the existing Sheffield urban air quality
management area (AQMA). The air quality analysis undertaken for the Tinsley
Link Environmental Statement (for the planning application) states that in the
forecast years, the scheme is expected to reduce the number of receptors which
exceed the EU limit value for Nitrogen Dioxide, especially those located in
sensitive areas such as residential properties on Sheffield Road. This accords
with the approach required by the NPPF.
3.329 In paragraph 178. The NPPF places emphasis on neighbouring local authorities
and transport providers working collaboratively on strategic issues that cross
administrative boundaries, including large scale proposals where appropriate. In
this case it is to provide viable infrastructure necessary to support and enable
sustainable development. Developed as a partnership between Sheffield City
Council, Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council and the South Yorkshire
Passenger Transport Executive, the BRT North scheme represents crossboundary investment that will directly achieve the requirement of a ‘duty to
cooperate’, and it represents proactive planning to help achieve economic growth
and meet the development needs of business.
Core Strategy
3.330 The spatial strategy identifies priorities for the Lower Don Valley which BRT North
will contribute toward 226:
‘The Lower and Upper Don Valley will continue to complement the City Centre as
strategic employment areas and will provide for businesses and workers that
require different kinds of area from the City Centre. They will take advantage of
current and proposed transport links and the relative attractiveness of the
locations for developers. Specific gateway locations and routes will be improved
to enhance the areas’ attractiveness.
Transport investment will be critical, including measures to offset potential
congestion at motorway junctions 33 and 34 and ensure that air quality is
acceptable. This will be necessary to support objectives for health and well-being,
efficient use of the transport network and supporting sustainable transport’.
3.331 Core Strategy policies which the new road will specifically support include:
226
Core Strategy, paragraphs 4.13 and 4.16
- 163 -
•
CS51 ‘Transport Priorities’. These include promoting choice by developing
alternatives to the car, maximising accessibility, containing congestion levels,
improving air quality and supporting economic objectives.
•
CS52 ‘Key Route Network’: The A6178 (Sheffield Rd) is an identified Key
Route and forms the main spine of the Bus Rapid Transit Northern Route.
•
CS56 ‘Priority Routes for Bus and Bus Rapid Transit’. The A6178 is
specifically identified for improvement through the introduction of bus priority
measures.
•
CS59 ‘New Roads'. The policy specifically refers to the Tinsley Link, which
meets the qualifying criteria for new roads set out in the policy in that it
improves the movement of public transport; and enables the development of
strategic employment sites in the Lower Don Valley 227.
•
CS7 ‘Meadowhall’. This policy sets out transport measures required to
mitigate the impact of new development on the surrounding road network and
enable employment uses to be delivered. These measures include provision
of the Tinsley Link road and improvements to public transport for workers and
visitors. The BRT North service would provide the required solution.
•
CS66 ‘Air Quality’. The Environmental Statement produced for the Tinsley
Link demonstrates that the scheme delivers air quality benefits to residents
on the A6178 road corridor due to traffic 228.
Sheffield City Region Transport Strategy
3.332 Supporting economic growth is a key objective of the Sheffield City Region
Transport Strategy 2011-2026. This creates a very strong strategic fit for the
delivery of BRT North which is fundamental to the growth aspirations of the joint
economy of Sheffield and Rotherham, which is dependent on effective
connectivity and providing sustainable access to jobs, see also paragraph 1.55.
3.333 The specific policies to which this scheme will directly contribute toward are:
227
228
•
To improve connectivity between major settlements,
•
To deliver interventions required for development and regeneration,
•
To develop public transport that connects people to jobs and training in both
urban and rural areas,
Core Strategy, pages 95,102, and 106
Core Strategy, page 118
- 164 -
•
To develop user-friendly public transport covering all parts of Sheffield City
Region, with high quality of integration between different modes,
•
Create sustainable access to new jobs that may otherwise not be located
near a public transport route.
Sheffield-Rotherham Don Valley Masterplan
3.334 The aim of this Masterplan is to realise the economic potential of the area. It is
intended as a framework for integrating the investment plans of public and private
stakeholders in the area, and to aid the delivery of vital infrastructure works. See
Chapter 1 paragraph 1.52. The BRT Northern Route, inclusive of the Tinsley Link,
represents a significant strand of the transport requirements as laid out in the
Masterplan, and is identified as vital enabling infrastructure if the vision for the
Sheffield – Rotherham Don Valley is to be realised.
Justification
Alternative Options
3.335 Modifications to existing junctions - In 2005, the Highways agency, in
partnership with the Council and Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council,
commissioned a study to review potential improvement options for Junction 34 of
the M1, and look at whether any were capable of accommodating the
development ambitions for the region and assisting economic recovery. The
Memorandum of Understanding Strategic Transport Initiatives 2005 (known as
the MOUSTI study) considered modifications to signal timings and the closure of
roundabout arms. It concluded that due to immovable constraints no practical
junction-based capacity improvement scheme was feasible. The MOUSTI study
concluded that an intervention which enabled vehicles to be removed from J34,
such as the Tinsley Link, was necessary if traffic generated by future
developments was to be accommodated.
3.336 Extend the Supertram system along LDV corridor to Rotherham - A Major
Scheme Business Case was submitted to Central Government for funding for
tram route extension in September 2005. Whilst the strategic need of the
proposal was recognised by the Department for Transport, it chose to reject the
tram extension scheme and instead recommend that the South Yorkshire
partners consider more fully a bus-based alternative that offered greater value for
money. Although this option deals with public transport connectivity, the modal
shift that may have been expected as a result would not fully deal with congestion
issues that are constraining development.
3.337 Bus Rapid Transit (north) - BRT North was the subject of a successful bid to the
Department for Transport for Major Scheme funding in December 2011, and is
being delivered in accordance with a programme agreed by the funding body.
The Tinsley Link Road is the largest single infrastructure element of the BRT
- 165 -
North project. The new road will be approximately 800m in length. The road will
enable priority for BRT and other public transport vehicles and directly provide the
additional highway capacity necessary to enable economic regeneration and
sustainable access.
Justification for Choice of Option
3.338 BRT (north) is the preferred way to deliver additional capacity at J34south for the
following reasons:
• BRT has Government Major Scheme support and funding,
• It will provide vital additional highway capacity, reducing congestion and
enabling significant development proposals to come forward,
• Provide a bespoke high quality, public transport system that will provide
sustainable access to strategic employment sites. Indeed current constraints
on the highway network mean that some significant site allocations will be
unable to fully proceed without the additional transport capacity that will be
provided by the scheme, for example see sites P00127 River Don District (see
paragraph 3.52) and P00182 Outokumpu (see paragraph 3.144).
• Improves connectivity between Sheffield and Rotherham, which as an interdependent economy, supports and strengthens the economic heart of Sheffield
City Region,
• Provide modal shift, reduce carbon emissions and addresses air quality issues
within Sheffield’s urban Air Quality Management Area,
• Improves connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists between the residential area
of Tinsley and the Lower Don Valley. The provision of a shared footway and
cycleway along the Tinsley Link will provide a more direct route to the
Meadowhall Shopping Centre (a walking distance of approximately 800m) and
Meadowhall Transport Interchange (a walking distance of approximately
1.1km).
3.339 The Tinsley Link was shown as a site allocation at previous plan stages
(reference number P00166); in order to safeguard the area of land needed to
deliver the new road. It is now shown as a proposal because of the increased
certainty brought by Government Major Scheme approval, together with the
planning consent, and to indicate the critical importance of the new road to deliver
the spatial strategy in the Core strategy see paragraph 3.330.
- 166 -
Sustainability and Equality Issues
3.340 Sustainability and Equality appraisal refers to benefits of the Tinsley Link in terms
of the contribution it makes to creating a strong economy with good job
opportunities, concentrating jobs in accessible areas, and securing the effective
use of land and the transport network. It refers to roads only being built where
they would open up areas for regeneration and employment, or reduce
congestion, providing favourable conditions for business growth. On the negative
side it does say, roads can contribute to increase emissions, they can increase
the demand for roads and potentially impact on the natural environment. These
issues have all been addressed as part of the planning application, see
paragraph 3.342.
Consultee Preference
3.341 There was generally support for this new road at both Preferred Options and
Draft Stage consultations 229. One objection was received from a landowner
affected by the proposal, who considered that it was not appropriate to allocate
the route when the delivery was uncertain, and any safeguarding of land should
be time limited 230. Events have overtaken this objection, planning consent is in
place and delivery is now more certain, and is reflected in its status as a road
proposal on the Proposals Map.
Effectiveness
Delivery
3.342 Outline planning permission has been secured for the Tinsley Link 231 , which has
established the principle, alignment and scale of the proposal, with only matters
of appearance having been reserved. Extensive consultation was undertaken
with statutory bodies, stakeholders, the public and occupiers of the land affected
during the planning process and the development of the proposals. The land
assembly needed to deliver the project is complete.
3.343 BRT North will be implemented by the South Yorkshire Bus Rapid Transit
Northern Route Partnership, which consists of the Council, South Yorkshire
Passenger Transport Executive and Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council.
governed by an agreement which sets out the roles and responsibilities of the
partner organisations, and their delivery obligations.
3.344 Site issues to be dealt with have all been identified as part of the planning
application process and necessary mitigation agreed. The key ones are:
229
Preferred Options: British Land Comment ID 920; E.On Comment ID 1669; Draft stage SYPTE
Comment ID 693
230
Ordic Investments Draft stage Comment ID 740
231
Planning application reference 10/03699/RG3 3rd May, 2011
- 167 -
•
Flood risk -The application site crosses the full range of flood risk zones, 1,
2 and 3 (see paragraph 3.16). It is principally situated in flood zone 3a,
(greater than 1 in 100 annual probability of fluvial flooding). The flood risk
assessment carried out for the planning application shows that it will not
worsen flooding elsewhere and it has been designed to be resilient to
climate change. It also passes the sequential and exception tests as
required by national policy.
•
Other environmental issues including impact on air quality, impact from
transport emissions, and noise to existing residents (primarily on Sheffield
Road). The proposal is expected to improve impacts here as the amount
of traffic on Sheffield Road should be reduced once the road is
operational.
Flexibility and Risk
3.345 There is a risk that the total amount of funding to deliver the project may not be
available, or may significantly delay the implementation and have consequent
knock on effects for delivering site allocations.
3.346 The total cost of the Bus Rapid Transit Northern Route is £34.3m. Major
Transport Scheme funding award from Central Government is for £19.4m and the
remainder of the funding for BRT North is to be provided from a combination of
Local Authority Contribution, private sector contribution secured through the
planning process 232, and other loans and bids including a bid to the European
Development Fund.,
Monitoring
3.347 There are no points for monitoring this proposal.
Conclusions on Soundness of Transport proposal
3.348 The inclusion of Tinsley Link as a transport proposal is considered sound for the
following reason:
3.349 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed development requirements set out in the
Sheffield City Region Transport strategy and the Sheffield/Rotherham Don
Valley Masterplan (paragraphs 3.332 and 3.334).
232
All major planning applications where Transport assessment has shown that traffic generated by the
development will add movements to J34south at peak times have been required to make a contribution
towards provision of the Tinsley Link. Currently there is signed Section 106 agreements amounting to
£2.2m, plus uncommitted sites yet to come forward.
- 168 -
3.350 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver policy CS59 ‘New Roads.
•
A new road is needed to support the economic objectives for the Lower
Don Valley set out in the Core Strategy and address local environmental
and congestion problems caused by traffic on unsuitable routes.
3.351 It will be effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period because it has planning consent and
the funding is being assembled (paragraph 3.346),
3.352 It is consistent with national policy:
•
Bus Rapid Transit North (BRT) (including the Tinsley Link) represents
proactive planning to help achieve economic growth, and help meet the
development needs of business in the Lower Don Valley, by creating
additional highway capacity in an area of identified congestion. Showing
the BRT route and the Tinsley Link on the proposals map will support the
delivery of local development sites and hence economic growth (NPPF
paragraphs 19-21).
•
Tinsley Link is an example of neighbouring local authorities and transport
providers working collaboratively on strategic issues that cross
administrative boundaries, to provide viable infrastructure necessary to
support and enable sustainable development in the Lower Don Valley
between Sheffield and Rotherham. (NPPF paragraph 31 ‘Promoting
sustainable transport’).
•
BRT north will encourage modal shift to public transport by providing
opportunity to deliver development that will contribute to reduced
greenhouse gas emissions (NPPF paragraphs 95-96’Adapting to climate
change’).
Sites no longer included
3.353 A number of sites were proposed for allocation at previous consultation stages
that are now withdrawn. The table below sets out why they are no longer
included.
- 169 -
3.354 Preferred Options (2007)
Site number
P00126
Coleford Road
P00135
Solpro, Windsor Street
P00147
E.on Blackburn
Meadows
P00152
Faraday Rd
P00165
Tinsley Marshalling
Yards
P00168
Hecla Works
P00176
Scania Depot
P00190
Sheffield Business
Park
P00192
Shepcote Lane/Europa
Link
P00199Tinsley Park
Steelworks
P00200
Vantage Riverside
P00218
Nunnery Sidings
P00229
Broadoaks Lane
659
Hawke Street
P00144
Kvaerner Car Park
P00186
Main Road
P00411
Handsworth Road
635
Staniforth Road
637
Eleanor Street
Allocation
Reason
Industrial
Site in use and not available
Industrial
Site in use and not available
Industrial
Biomass Power Station under
construction
Industrial
Site in use and not available
Industrial
Partly developed and permission
granted for remainder
Industrial
Site in use and not available
Industrial
Site in use and not available
Business or
Industrial
Site developed
Business or
Industrial
Site developed
Industrial
Site in use and not available
Business or
Industrial
Business or
Industrial
Business or
Industrial
Business or
Industrial
Business or
Industrial
Site partly developed
Site in use and not available
Site developed
Site developed
Too small
Housing
Site developed
Housing
Site in use and not available
Housing
Site developed
Housing
Site developed
- 170 -
Site number
Allocation
Reason
640
Cresswell Road
Housing
Site developed
3.355 Draft Stage (July 2010)
Site number
P00151
Effingham Gasworks
P00169
Huntsmans Gardens
P00220
Off Parkway Avenue
P00139
Brightside Lane
P00481
Main Road, Darnall
Centre
Allocation
Reason
Industrial
Site in use and not available
Business or
Industrial
Business or
Industrial
Permission granted
(development imminent)
Site not developable
Industrial
Site developed
Retail
No longer deliverable
3.356 Additional Options (Jan 2012)
Site number
P00508
Bawtry Road
Proposed
Allocation
Housing
- 171 -
Reason
This site is shown as Open Space
on all previous versions of the
Proposals Map.
See paragraphs 2.297 and 2.304.
PART 2
SOUTH EAST URBAN CORE STRATEGY AREA
4
SOUTH EAST URBAN POLICY AREAS
Business Area
4.1
There is only one Business Area proposed in the South East Urban Area, within
the Manor Castle Ward at Alison Crescent.
4.2
Within a Business Area there are no preferred land uses. Land uses could
consist of a mixture of Offices (B1a) other B1 uses and/ or housing. This is
provided that:
•
•
Office development is provided in accordance with policy CS3 ‘Locations
for Office Development’
Residential uses (including any student accommodation and hostels) do
not cover more than 40% of the gross floorspace in the area 233.
4.3
This is an approach which introduces flexibility to create a new employment led
area in accordance with area masterplanning.
4.4
This is an existing Business Area where the boundary is being amended to reflect
recent expansion into the Open Space Area and changes at the Neighbourhood
Centre. Under the UDP there were two other Business Areas, at Wybourn along
Cricket Inn Road and at Blagden Street but these are not being taken forward in
the Local Plan.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.5
This area designation complies with the principles of the NPPF, and contributes
towards the delivery of its policies in terms of playing an economic role for
sustainable development. It will work towards the delivery of a competitive
economy by retaining an area that already accommodates business uses, and
safeguard it for future growth and/or redevelopment (NPPF paragraph 20- 21).
Core Strategy
4.6
233
Core Strategy policy CS3 promotes office development in accessible locations to
the edge of the City Centre, in District Centres, and on high-frequency public
transport routes. This particular location is an anomaly as smaller scale office
City Policies and Sites, Policy H1
- 173 -
uses alongside other employment generating uses, are being encouraged here.
This area is not on or near a high frequency public transport route, but is within
400m of a medium frequency route. However, the main emphasis here is to
promote local employment opportunities for the immediate surroundings so that
local residents can walk/ cycle to work. In this instance this policy designation
helps to meet a Core Strategy Objective set out in Challenge 5 ‘Opportunities for
All’ 234. Challenge S5.4 encourages localised employment opportunities in a
neighbourhood that suffers from deprivation, it will complement the adjoining
Neighbourhood Centre, and promote further growth for a range of employment
uses.
Other strategies or policies
4.7
The Manor Neighbourhood Development Framework (NDF) 235 identifies issues of
high unemployment within the Manor neighbourhood. This supports the
designation of a Business Area at Castlebeck including the existing Alison
Business Centre as a ‘community/economic’ focus. The NDF recognises that the
centre is currently weak but is a key gateway location, with potential to be
strengthened and reinforced by a wider movement and access strategy in the
area. In doing so this will meet the a Core Strategy Objective set out in
Challenge 9 ‘Objectives for reducing the need to travel’ Challenge S9.1
promotes development in locations that reduce the need to travel 236.
Justification
4.8
The amended Business Area boundary already consists of several office uses.
The Alison Business Centre is the trading arm of the charity Manor Development
Company Limited 237. The charity provides on-site support with administration,
facilities management, accounts and payroll services, and conference facility
access. A focus of the charity is to improve skills training within the local area,
and to encourage business set-ups that can provide local job opportunities that
can be accessed by the local population. The Centre has already been extended
on land formally designated as Open Space Area by the UDP. The change in the
Business Area boundary will reflect this.
4.9
The boundary is also being amended to reflect the changing nature of the
Neighbourhood Centre, as land previously designated as part of the Business
Area in the UDP has been redeveloped with a new supermarket. It is therefore
proposed that this area be redesignated to form part of the Neighbourhood
Centre to reflect this change.
234
Challenge S5.4, paragraph 3.16, page 16
See also Chapter 1, paragraph 1.81
236
Core Strategy Challenge S9.2, paragraph 3.24, page 18
237
www.mdcltd.org.uk
235
- 174 -
4.10
Overall, the proposed Business Area designation would provide for the
continuation of employment generating uses to increase access to employment
for local residents in a community where the long-term unemployment rate is
above the Sheffield average. It will also allow for small-scale housing
development that may complement the local character of the neighbouring
Housing Area.
4.11
The area at Cricket Inn Road and Blagden Street are being changed to other
policy area designations (Flexible Use Area and Housing Area respectively) to
reflect the changing nature of the areas (see below).
Alternative Options
4.12
There is no alternative policy area designation for Alison Crescent. Although a
Housing Area would permit a degree of employment generating uses within it; it
would not encourage employment uses as a Business Area does. As outlined
under Chapter 1 of this report, this area has been extensively master-planned
with input from stakeholders and local communities. The process highlighted the
importance of this Business Area and reinforced the need for it to be
strengthened. Furthermore, expansion of the Neighbourhood Centre and the
Alison Business Centre has already taken place and are reflected in the amended
boundary.
4.13
The area at Blagden Street has been proposed for Housing Area designation. At
present, it consists of warehousing and light industrial units, surrounded by an
established Housing Area to the south and west, with Open Space Area to the
East. The existing uses here do cause disturbance for neighbouring housing.
The surrounding environment is not suited to heavy goods traffic, since every
industrial unit here is within 50m of existing housing. The noise of manufacturing
processes here, even as light industry, does cause problems for these houses.
The existing uses here are consistent with those that would be allowed within an
Industry and Business Area. However, such a designation would be highly
inappropriate, as it would allow the continuation and possible expansion of
disruptive industrial and warehousing uses here. Instead, a designation as a
Housing Area is proposed in order to encourage redevelopment of this area for
residential use. A planning approval has already been approved for residential
redevelopment of the majority of this area.
4.14
At Cricket Inn Road a Flexible Use Area is being proposed to enable the area to
be used more effectively by allowing greater flexibility, but with a mix of uses that
are compatible with housing.
Sustainability Issues
4.15
There is a medium frequency bus route nearby, which is sufficient to ensure that
employees and others will be able to access the area without having to rely upon
private transport. In addition, development on this area will require the use of
- 175 -
Travel Plans to reduce potential dependence on car access (see policy E1
‘Development and Trip Generation’). As an example, the permission for
expansion to the Alison Business Centre has restricted levels of private parking
provision as a means of discouraging peak-hour commuting by car.
Equality Issues
4.16
Business Area designation will allow for the provision of local jobs within walking
distance of a variety of housing. This development will also provide local training
opportunities in an area of the city with above average unemployment. Allowing
new business investment which will improve business confidence in the local
community, which will aid regeneration.
4.17
Potential groups who could benefit the most of this area designation are those on
low incomes and with low access to private transport, as localised opportunities
may enable easier access to employment and training.
Consultee Preferences
4.18
No consultee comments were received with regards to the proposed Business
and Industrial Policy Areas.
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.19
The expansion of the Business Area has already occurred and future planning
applications will be decided through the process of Development Management.
The Economy and City Region Background Report sets out how applications for
development in Business Policy Areas will be assessed.
Flexibility and Risk
4.20
There is a reasonable amount of flexibility with this Policy Area designation as up
to 40% residential development could occur should there be any weakening of
market demand for commercial space.
Monitoring
4.21
The mix of uses and dominance of uses within this Policy Area will be reassessed
as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is provided in the
Economy and City Region Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Business Policy Area
4.22
The Business Area designation here is sound for the following reasons.
- 176 -
4.23
4.24
4.25
4.26
It is positively prepared:
•
It creates an opportunity for office and related employment and training in
an area of high unemployment that is undergoing regeneration.
•
It proactively reinforces the work of the Manor Castle Development Trust in
its regeneration efforts (paragraph 4.8).
It is justified:
•
It meets the Core Strategy objectives for localised employment
opportunities (aim S5.4) and reducing the need to travel (aim S9.1)
(paragraph 4.6).
•
It reinforces the provision for local jobs as set out under the
Neighbourhood Development Framework (paragraph 4.7).
•
It is compatible with neighbouring housing and the adjoining
Neighbourhood Centre – other employment designations could have
introduced uses that would be incompatible with neighbouring housing.
It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as there are already business uses
here and these are expected to continue (paragraph 4.12).
•
Even if demand for employment uses weakened some housing would still
be acceptable (paragraph 4.18).
It is consistent with national policy:
•
It will contribute to sustainable economic development as existing
businesses will be supported and future growth/ redevelopment
encouraged (NPPF paragraphs 20-21).
Business and Industrial Area
4.27
There are Business and Industrial Areas in the Manor Castle Ward along the
Parkway.
- 177 -
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.28
One of the objectives in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is
‘Building a strong competitive economy’. It states ‘Local Planning Authorities
should plan proactively to meet the development needs of businesses’ 238. This
area designation would support this objective, and serves a similar purpose to the
Business and Industry area on the other side of the Parkway in Darnall, see from
paragraph 2.39. The area is accessible via the Parkway and Supertram and
would provide employment opportunities in an area that suffers from deprivation
and high unemployment levels.
Core Strategy
4.29
In the Manor Castle Ward, Core Strategy policy CS9 ‘Attercliffe/Newhall and
Parkway/Kettlebridge’ supports the adoption of traditional and modern
manufacturing and distribution within the Parkway and Kettlebridge areas, this
area has large existing concentrations of industry and warehousing, and is well
placed in relation to Key Routes. This policy area forms part of that wider Core
Strategy area.
Other strategies or policies
4.30
The Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne Masterplan and the Manor
Neighbourhood Development Framework NDF both highlight above-average
rates of unemployment in their areas. They recommend promoting access to
existing employment sites that surround the area and this would be supported by
the Business and Industrial Area designation. See also paragraphs 1.81 and
1.83.
Justification
4.31
The areas covered by the Business and Industrial Areas (along Cricket Inn Road)
are already occupied by light industrial and business uses. These uses are
expected to continue as they are established businesses, and there is no
evidence to suggest that they wish to relocate. In order to allow for the needs of
these businesses (to allow expansion and consolidation where required), the
proposed land designation here needs to allow for both business and industrial
uses as ‘preferred’.
4.32
The area is served by tram stops at Cricket Inn Road and Nunnery Square
stations as well as a high frequency bus route along Maltravers Road. This
makes the area highly accessible by public transport, and employees would have
a viable alternative to the private car.
238
NPPF paragraph 19, page 6
- 178 -
4.33
The proximity of the site to the Parkway (which can be accessed from junctions
close to this site) and the strategic road network will allow for easy freight access
for any business use on the site. This reduces the need for heavy goods vehicles
to travel through parts of the city (especially Housing Areas) where such traffic
may cause noise or pollution nuisance.
4.34
A boundary change is being proposed to the Business and Industrial Area from
the UDP Map to reflect the changing nature of the area, as the land between
Cricket Inn Road and the Parkway is now being shown as a General Employment
Area, and land at the edge at Maltravers Road is being changed to Housing Area.
This is discussed below at paragraphs 4.52 and 4.159.
Alternative Options
4.35
No other policy area designations were considered appropriate as this is an
existing business and industrial area with existing thriving businesses.
4.36
Designation as an Industrial Area would be inappropriate because it would allow
for uses such as open storage, lorry parks, and waste management, which would
be more likely to cause noise and other disturbance for nearby residents within
400m.
4.37
Due to existing light industrial facilities and warehousing, and the proximity to
noise and pollution from the Parkway, housing use would also be inappropriate
for the area. Therefore a Business Area designation, which would allow housing
as an acceptable use, has not been considered as a realistic option either.
Sustainability Issues
4.38
The redevelopment and consolidation of sites here for research and development
(B1b), light industry (B1c), general industry (B2) and warehouses and storage
(B8) uses here would benefit from having very good accessibility to public
transport, reducing the need for employees to access their place of work by
private transport, and for disturbance of residential areas by heavy goods
vehicles.
Equality Issues
4.39
The consolidation and possible future redevelopment of sites here for the
preferred uses will provide jobs within walking distance of housing to the south
(within 600m), providing localised employment and skills training in an area of
above average unemployment levels.
4.40
Potential groups who could benefit the most of this area designation are those on
low incomes and with low access to private transport, as localised opportunities
may enable easier access to employment and training.
- 179 -
Consultee Preferences
4.41
No consultee comments were received with regards to the proposed Business
and Industrial Policy Areas.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
4.42
Existing uses are expected to remain in the area and no significant
redevelopment opportunities exist within the Policy Area. However, if sites do
become available in the future, the designation will support reuse of the land for
business and industrial uses. Future planning applications will be decided
through the process of Development Management in accordance with the policy
area menu. The Economy and City Region Background Report sets out how
applications for development in this Policy Area will be assessed.
Monitoring
4.43
The mix of uses and dominance of uses within Business and Industrial Policy
Areas will be reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further
information is provided in the Economy and City Region Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Business and Industry Policy Area
4.44
The policy area designations proposed are considered sound for the following
reasons.
4.45
It is positively prepared:
•
4.46
It proactively meets the requirement to set aside land for Business/
Industrial Uses, and reinforces the current uses in the area whilst
encouraging future opportunities for employment uses. It is in a location
that is both highly accessible and in an area of deprivation so could help
meet local employment needs (paragraph 4.31).
It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Core Strategy policy CS9 that supports the adoption
of traditional and modern manufacturing and distribution within Parkway/
Kettlebridge (paragraph 4.28).
•
It reinforces the provision for local jobs as set out under the
Neighbourhood Development Framework (paragraph 4.38).
- 180 -
•
4.47
It is effective:
•
4.48
It is compatible with the adjacent residential neighbourhood, the Flexible
Use area and the General Employment Area.
It is deliverable over the plan period as it covers an area of existing
Business and Industry uses that are expected to continue.
It is consistent with national policy:
•
It will contribute towards sustainable economic growth as existing
businesses will be supported and future growth/ redevelopment
encouraged (NPPF paragraph 19).
General Employment Area
4.49
Two General Employment Areas are designated in Manor Castle Ward. The first
is to the north of Cricket Inn Road in the middle of the Business and Industrial
Area adjoining the Parkway. The area is presently used as a retail park. The
second is at the junction of Prince of Wales Road and the Sheffield Parkway
and currently includes a hotel, petrol station and restaurant.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.50
This designation supports Core Planning Principle number 9 at paragraph 17
which refers to ‘promote mixed use developments and encourage multiple
benefits from the use of land’. It acknowledges the nature of the uses already
present in the area.
Core Strategy
4.51
General Employment Areas are employment areas that have the widest flexibility
in terms of the range of uses that could be accommodated. Policy CS9
‘Attercliffe/Newhall and Parkway/Kettlebridge’ supports the adoption of traditional
and modern manufacturing and distribution within the Parkway/Kettlebridge area,
and promotes these areas as employment locations, and the area is well placed
in relation to Key Routes for accessibility.
Justification
4.52
The area at Cricket Inn Road presently has a mix of employment and leisure
uses, with some vacant brownfield sites offering the potential for additional
employment uses in the area. At Prince of Wales Road, currently the area is
- 181 -
fully developed with a mix of established employment uses. The General
Employment Area reflects this use on the ground.
4.53
Neither of the General Employment Areas has a single use dominating, but both
are suitable for future employment development. There are some small-scale
empty and underutilized sites in both areas, where a designation that allows for
flexibility would assist in the redevelopment of these sites by providing
landowners more options for redevelopment of the sites.
4.54
As such, a General Employment Area is proposed rather than a Business and
Industry or Industrial Area designation. Neither area has large sites available for
large-scale business development, so not safeguarding future business
development land here will not affect the targets within Core Strategy policy CS1
’Land for Employment and Economic Development'.
Alternative Options
4.55
There are no appropriate alternative options for this policy area.
4.56
At Cricket Inn Road this proposal reflects the existing retail warehousing in the
area. Under the UDP this was a Business and Industrial Area, but this
designation is no longer appropriate given the current use. A Business Area
would also be inappropriate as residential uses, acceptable in this area type,
would not be acceptable adjacent to the Parkway and nearby industry.
4.57
At Prince of Wales Road the designation again reflects the uses already on the
ground. Neither a Business Area nor Flexible Use Area would be appropriate as
they would allow residential uses, that would not be appropriate given the
proximity to the Parkway
Other Planning Justification
4.58
Neighbouring residential areas in Manor and Wybourn suffer from above
average levels of unemployment, as identified in the Manor Neighbourhood
Development Framework (NDF) 239, and Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne
Masterplan 240. These areas will benefit from the establishment and consolidation
of employment sites within these General Employment Areas.
Sustainability Issues
4.59
239
240
The General Employment Areas will allow for employment generating uses and
some small-scale sites may potentially become redeveloped for employment uses
during the plan period.
Manor NDF, pp.12-16
Masterplan, page 6
- 182 -
4.60
The area at Cricket Inn Road has access to a high frequency transport route
from the Supertram stop, and neighbouring high-frequency bus route. This will
allow for employees to reach their place of work without having to rely on private
transport.
4.61
The area at Prince of Wales Road is within 400m of a medium frequency bus
route (every 15-20 minutes), which offers good public transport access. The area
is also within walking distance to residential areas in Lower Manor to the South
and Darnall to the North, providing for local employment.
Equality Issues
4.62
Small redevelopment for employment generating uses here will have equality
benefits in providing jobs within easy access of public transport (within 600m of
residential areas), which will have benefits for providing employment for people
without access to private transport. Young people will especially benefit as this
group tend to have reduced access to private transport. Jobs and skills will also
be provided in the local area, which suffers from higher than average rates of
unemployment
Consultee Preferences
4.63
No consultee comments were received with regards to the proposed General
Employment Areas
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.64
As the areas covered by the designations are largely developed, existing uses
will tend to remain. Delivery of new developments will be via the Development
Management process. The Economy and City Region Background Report sets
out how applications for development in General Employment Areas will be
assessed.
Flexibility and Risk
4.65
The flexibility offered will reduce the risk of loss of demand from particular uses.
It is expected that some kinds of employment uses will continue to be needed in
the general area and these locations have good prospects.
Monitoring
4.66
There are no requirements to maintain dominance for particular uses in these
areas. The mix of uses and dominance of any uses within General Employment
Areas will be reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further
information is provided in the Economy and City Region Background Report.
- 183 -
Conclusions on the Soundness of the General Employment Policy Area
4.67
The policy area designations proposed are considered sound for the following
reasons.
4.68
It is positively prepared:
•
4.69
4.70
It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Core Strategy policies that require accessibly
locations for business/ commercial/ industrial uses.
•
It reinforces the provision for local jobs as set out under the
Neighbourhood Development Framework (paragraph 4.51).
•
It is compatible with the adjacent uses and the most appropriate
designation as industry would not be suitable next to the residential areas,
and residential uses (acceptable in Business Areas) would not be suitable
adjacent to the Parkway.
It is effective:
•
4.71
It objectively meets the requirement to set aside land for Business/
Industrial Uses, and reinforces the current uses in the area whilst
encouraging future opportunities for employment uses. It is in a location
that is both highly accessible and in an area of deprivation, so could help
meet local employment needs (paragraph 4.52).
It is deliverable over the plan period as it allows a general degree of
flexibility as there are no preferred uses but a range of acceptable uses.
It is consistent with national policy:
•
It is consistent with NPPF policy as it will contribute towards sustainable
economic growth as existing businesses will be supported and future
growth/ redevelopment encouraged. These areas encourage development
that ‘promote mixed use developments and encourage multiple benefits
from the use of land’ (NPPF paragraph 17).
District Centre Policy Area
4.72
There is only one District Shopping Centre in the South East Urban Area at
Manor Top. This is at the crossroads between Prince of Wales Road, City Road
and Mansfield Road and falls mainly within the Arbourthorne Ward, although
- 184 -
there is a small part that falls within the Richmond Ward. The boundary of the
centre as shown on the UDP Proposals Map is being amended to reflect the
changing nature of the centre, in particular a large piece of land at the current
Territorial Army site that is now shown as Flexible Use Area (see paragraph
4.218).
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.73
The definition of a clear policy area boundary to the district centre supports NPPF
objective 2. ‘Ensuring the vitality of town centres’ (paragraph 23). The district
centre boundary indicates where shops and community facilities will be preferred
uses.
4.74
The NPPF promotes positive policies for centres which should include policy for
the management and growth of centres to encourage economic activity, and
states that the plan should define the extent of the centre based on areas of
primary and secondary frontages. It states in particular
‘Recognise town centres as the heart of communities and pursue policies
to support their viability and vitality’.
This is supported by strategic policy CS38 ‘Manor Top District Centre’ 241 which is
about promoting the renewal of the centre, and giving priority to improvement of
appearance and accessibility (see paragraph 4.78).
4.75
This policy area designation also complies with the NPPF and contributes
towards the delivery of sustainable development, in terms of the ‘social role’ of
supporting strong, vibrant, and healthy communities. Objective 8 ‘Promoting
Healthy Communities’(paragraph 70) states that planning should ensure that
established shops, facilities and services are able to develop and modernise in a
way that is sustainable, and retained for the benefit of the community. The
definition of a strong district centre boundary on the Proposals Map will support
development and modernisation within the centre.
Core Strategy
4.76
241
242
Core Strategy objective 3 is ‘A city that has attractive, sustainable
neighbourhoods where people are happy to live, offering everyone a range of
facilities and services’ 242. The provision of District and Neighbourhood Centres
will help to safeguard retail and community facilities within specific areas where
they are required and serve a local need, meeting this objective.
Core Strategy, page 80
Core Strategy paragraph 3.4, page 13
- 185 -
4.77
Core Strategy Policy CS34 ‘District Centres’ 243 identifies the District Centres
within Sheffield, and promotes their role as places to provide for everyday needs
with a range of retail, leisure and community facilities. Smaller scale offices and
residential developments are also promoted away from shop frontages to
complement shops and services. The policy identifies the improvement of Manor
Top as a priority, with potential for expansion.
4.78
Policy CS38 also supports the renewal and (where possible) expansion of the
Manor Top District Centre to provide a wider range of retail and other services.
The District Centre designation defines the boundary, and supports the retention,
of key local service and community facilities. A Flexible Use Area is shown to the
north and south of the District Centre; this will enable opportunities for mixed use
development that will complement the uses of the centre. The area is excluded
from the District Centre because the potential for expanding the centre in this
location is constrained for traffic reasons, as indicated in the Core Strategy 244,
and some flexibility is needed to support the regeneration of this area next to the
centre allowing a wider range of appropriate land uses to serve the wider
neighbourhood, see also paragraph 4.228.
Other strategies or policies
4.79
The City Road NDF 245 and Manor NDF 246 both identify that Manor Top provides
a range of services for nearby residents, and emphasise the need to maintain
shops and services in this location. The Manor NDF proposes expanding the role
and service offer of the Centre and improving the degraded appearance of the
Centre. It identifies the improvement of Manor Top as a key long term
transformational project. The City Road Neighbourhood Development
Framework NDF demonstrates the need to improve the image of the Centre in
order to improve people’s perceptions of the wider neighbourhood, and to draw
investment in housing and the local economy. It concludes that improvements
and possible expansion will help it become more sustainable.
Justification
4.80
The District Centre is on a number of bus routes including high frequency bus
routes 42, 51, 53 and 120, and is also on the Supertram route. It is also within
walking distance of parts of the surrounding Housing Areas which are the focus of
housing renewal. The Manor Top tram stop and a mini transport interchange are
located at the heart of the centre which allows for public transport access to a
wider area. The good accessibility of the centre makes it a suitable location for
shopping and community facilities to serve neighbouring communities.
Furthermore, there are several large housing redevelopment sites nearby and the
243
Core Strategy, page 76
Core Strategy, page 81, paragraph 8.71
245
City Road NDF, pages 27, 28 and 35
246
Manor NDF, page 21
244
- 186 -
regeneration/ renewal of the District Centre will have an impact on the
attractiveness of these sites, in terms of influencing inwards investment and
strengthening developer confidence in an area where the housing market is
weak.
Alternative Options
4.81
The boundary of the District Centre is drawn to reflect the core areas of retail use
that are to be protected and enhanced. An alternative designation for Manor
Top that would give priority to non-retail use would undermine the Core Strategy
policy conferring District Centre status and hinder regeneration within the local
area. The designation of a District Centre on the Proposals Map reflects the list
of District Centres set out in CS34.
4.82
There are two main changes to the area shown as the Manor Top District Centre
in the UDP. A small addition has been made to the Centre to the north, along
City Road, encompassing an area where a working men’s club, a job centre and
some offices are located. These are non-retail services which form part of the
District Centre function, and their inclusion will help to support the retention of
such facilities here in keeping with Core Strategy policy CS38.
4.83
The second change to the District Centre boundary relates to the Manor Top
Territorial Army Centre (TAVR) site to the south east which had been shown on
the UDP as within the District Centre. Although still currently occupied by the
Territorial Army it was identified as a site that could offer the potential for District
Centre expansion, in particular as a site for a major foodstore. This area is now
shown as a Flexible Use Area. This was excluded from the District Centre for
reasons about traffic capacity, see also paragraph 4.78.
4.84
The Sheffield Retail Survey 247 had identified an opportunity to claw back a
significant proportion of the trade going to nearby out of centre stores within the
local area (identified as zone 8 in the survey). It anticipated that up to 50% of
trade could be realistically clawed back if a large new foodstore were provided
within the District Centre, and this would have also assisted the aims of Core
Strategy policy CS38. However, the study also pointed to traffic surveys
undertaken by the Manor Top Feasibility Survey 248, which strongly suggested that
any future new store provision within or on the edge of Manor Top will be limited
in size by traffic constraints. In particular, generation of additional traffic into the
heart of the District Centre leading to significant delays on the public transport
system, and severe impact on the major highways network (A6102 & A6135)
through the Manor Top junction. Based on highway advice the City Road NDF
recommends a limit of 1,850 sq m gross retail floorspace.
247
Sheffield Retail Study by Cushman and Wakefield, 2010 and the Sheffield Retail Study by White Young
Green, 2003 See Sheffield City Council - Retail Studies in Sheffield
248
Manor Top Feasibility Study, Sheffield City Council, 2007. Sheffield City Council - Manor Top
Feasibility Study
- 187 -
4.85
Whilst a new foodstore of this scale could be accommodated either in the centre,
or on its edge, this scale of store is unlikely to be sufficient to generate the claw
back required to offer significant regeneration benefits to the centre.
4.86
To enable maximum flexibility for use of land at the edge of the designated
District Centre, land to the south - east of the Centre, including the TAVR site, is
now shown as a Flexible Use Area. This will allow for mixed use development, in
line with policy H1, which may incorporate retail, leisure, and residential uses that
would complement the existing centre and may encourage linked visits, (see also
paragraph 4.228 below). This strategy is supported by the City Road NDF.
Sustainability Issues
4.87
In terms of sustainability, the District Centre area is well located for people
making use of public transport, and will offer facilities close to people’s homes to
the north, reducing the need for people to travel.
Equality Issues
4.88
The renewal of the District Centre will benefit local people, especially those who
may have low incomes and poor access to private transport.
Consultee Preferences
4.89
Comments from Tesco and the owner of the TAVR site were received at the
Preferred Options and Draft Plan stages, objecting to the proposed removal of
the TAVR site from the District Centre designation and designation as a Flexible
Use Area. This comment is discussed within the Flexible Use Area section below
(see paragraph 4.235).
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
4.90
No significant new development is envisaged within the amended boundary of the
Manor Top District Centre. There are opportunities, however, for the renewal of
existing facilities, including improvements to the pedestrian environment and
renewal of existing retail units, which the policy area would allow. The policy area
designation will allow a range of shops and community facilities, whilst
maintaining the dominance of shops, to be achieved through the Development
Management process. Should no significant development take place here, the
District Centre is likely to remain as existing, which will not result in the formation
of empty sites. Neighbouring Flexible Use Areas will enable small scale
development of a variety of uses to complement the District Centre in accordance
with the aims of CS38.
- 188 -
4.91
Sites within the Centre are privately owned, and any re-development will be
pursued by private developers of the existing units. The vacancy rate in the
centre has dropped since 2005, although it is still above average for District
Centres. The Sheffield Retail Study suggests that there is unmet demand in the
catchment zone for this centre, so the risk of not maintaining the frontage
requirement set out in policy C4’Development in District and Neighbourhood
Centres’ is not high. The centre currently complies with frontage policy when D1
Community Uses, like the library, are added to A1 shops.
Monitoring
4.92
The mix and dominance of uses within the District Centre will be reassessed as
part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is provided in
the Neighbourhoods Background Report.
Conclusions on the Soundness of the District Shopping Centre
4.93
The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
4.94
It is positively prepared:
•
4.95
4.96
It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy
relating to District Centres, specifically CS38 ‘Manor Top District Centre’
(paragraph 4.78).
•
It is the most appropriate boundary for the centre when considered against
the reasonable alternatives and taking on board existing core areas and
constraints on neighbouring sites (paragraph 4.78).
It is effective:
•
4.97
It meets objectively assessed development/ infrastructure requirements
needed to support and promote renewal of the centre set out in the
Neighbourhood Development Frameworks by enabling the provision of
local amenities in a strategic location (paragraph 4.79).
It is deliverable over the plan period as this is an existing District Centre.
It is consistent with national policy:
• A clear boundary to the district centre, supported by the promotion of
regeneration in policy CS38 supports NPPF objective 2. ‘Ensuring the
vitality of town centres’.
- 189 -
• Identification and promotion of this area as a District Centre will support
retention of existing shops and services and enable them to develop for the
benefit of the community (NPPF Objective 8 ‘Promoting Healthy
Communities’).
Neighbourhood Centre Policy Area
4.98
Neighbourhood Centres serving more localised communities are dispersed
throughout the South East Urban Area, serving local communities with retail,
financial and community facilities and services. . There are 16 centres either
fully or partly located in that part of the South East Urban Area which lies within
the East Community Assembly Area. These are:
Manor Castle Ward
Arbourthorne Ward
• Duke Street
• Wybourn (Manor Oaks
Road)
• Manor (Upper)
• Manor (Lower) (Prince
of Wales Road)
• Fairleigh
• Manor Park
(Harborough Avenue)
• Northern Avenue
• Park Grange Road
• Gleadless Townend
(part) - see Richmond
Ward
• Ridgeway Road
Richmond & Darnall
Ward
• Mansfield Road
(Intake)
• Richmond Road
• Stradbroke Drive
• Handsworth (part)
• Gleadless Townend
(part)
• Jaunty Way (part)
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.99
The identification of neighbourhood centres on the Proposals Map where shops
and services are the preferred use in locations convenient for those living and
working in surrounding areas is consistent with the NPPF at Objective 8
‘Promoting Healthy Communities’(paragraph 70). The NPPF states that planning
should ensure that established shops, facilities and services are able to develop
and modernise in a way that is sustainable, and retained for the benefit of the
community.
Core Strategy
4.100 Policy CS39 ‘Neighbourhood Centres’ 249 encourages the development of local
shops and community facilities to serve everyday needs within Neighbourhood
Centres. The facilities of the most viable Neighbourhood Centres within Housing
249
Core Strategy, page 81
- 190 -
Market Renewal areas will be improved and strengthened and their environments
improved.
Other strategies or policies
4.101 The Manor NDF has a vision to achieve a strong hierarchy of easily accessible
centres within Manor 250, with a wider range of shops and community facilities.
The hierarchy includes Manor (Upper), and Manor (Lower) Neighbourhood
Centres within the Manor Estate. The designation of these areas as
Neighbourhood Centres will help to safeguard retail and community facilities in
these locations, in accordance with the principles of the NDF.
4.102 The Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne Masterplan 251 has a vision to
improve the existing centre at Northern Avenue and to create a new
neighbourhood centre in Wybourn alongside Manor Oaks Road incorporating
new facilities alongside a new urban square, in order to improve the facilities on
offer to local people.
4.103 The City Road NDF promotes the establishment of community facilities and
shopping facilities on Duke Street to complement existing community facilities
located here (including a working men’s club and medical centre). The
designation of a new Neighbourhood Centre here will encourage the realising of
these visions, as the preferred uses for this area designation will correspond with
these aims.
4.104 One of the key objectives of the Norfolk Park Regeneration Plan 252 was to create
a high quality community and business facilities centre with a range of shops and
services to replace the obsolete shopping parade at Park Grange Drive.
Justification
4.105 Each Neighbourhood Centre will support the continuation of the role of these
areas to provide community and retail facilities for local communities, and they
help to give a focal point and identity to the surrounding areas. The boundaries of
the neighbourhood centres shown on the Proposals Map reflect the area where,
using the provisions of policy C4 ‘Development in District and Neighbourhood
Centres’, the existing and proposed shopping centre function can be protected,
and where investment to ensure the centre thrives will be encouraged. An
alternative designation for any of these areas would counter this benefit, and
would reduce the sustainability of communities within the area. All of the
identified Neighbourhood Centres will comprise of a range of facilities suitable for
them to be classified in this way.
250
Manor Neighbourhood Development Framework pp.70-72
See page 32
252
See Chapter 1, paragraph 1.87
251
- 191 -
Alternative Options
4.106 There are some centres within the East Community Assembly area that were
shown as Local Shopping Centres on the UDP Proposals Map that are not being
taken forward into the Local Plan. This is due to the changing nature of the areas.
For example, in the Manor Castle and Arbourthorne areas the extensive
masterplanning has highlighted the need for consolidation and strengthening
centres in a strategic location within neighbourhoods. The areas where shopping
and other centre uses are no longer viable are better served by designation as
other policy areas to allow a wider range of new uses to come forward.
4.107 These include areas on Cricket Inn Road, at Fairleigh (next to Prince of Wales
Road), Southend Road (next to Manor Lodge), East Bank Road, Handsworth
Road (by the Parkway roundabout), Willow Rd, and Four Lane Ends at
Richmond which are all now designated as Housing Areas. This reflects the
limited role of these centres to serve a neighbourhood function (all consisting of
only very few A1 units) and the fact that the location of these rows of shops, and
the existence of residential units within them, next to housing makes this the most
suitable designation (as their main role is to complement the surrounding housing
area).
4.108 There are some centres where the boundary has been amended from that shown
on the UDP proposals map:
•
Fairleigh (Cary Road) the boundary has been amended to exclude an
area of open space and include some properties that accommodate uses
that should form part of the Neighbourhood Centre.
•
Manor (Prince of Wales Road) where the boundary has been amended to
reflect the expansion of the centre that has already occurred with the
creation of a supermarket. This additional area was previously part of the
Business Area but no longer performs that role.
•
Intake (Mansfield Road), where the boundary has been consolidated to
reflect the core areas of retail use and indicate where Neighbourhood
Centre uses have declined, by redesignating the western and southern
ends (as shown on the UDP Proposals Map) as Housing Area. Also an
area north of Woodhouse Road is designated as a Flexible Use Area to
allow a wider range of new uses to come forward, though this would not
preclude ‘edge-of-centre’ shopping, (see also paragraph 4.231).
•
Stradbroke Drive, where the boundary has been amended to exclude an
area off Smelterwood Lane, which is an area of informal open space, and
include the public house at Smelterwood Crescent.
- 192 -
4.109 The centre at Manor Oaks Road in Wybourn is in a Housing Area in the UDP,
and comprises of a community centre and school at present. The delivery of
additional shops alongside the community centre is envisaged by the Wybourn
Manor Park and Arbourthorne masterplan and sites have been cleared to enable
funded development here. To achieve this and to safeguard retail use here, a
Neighbourhood Centre designation is appropriate.
4.110 The new centre for Norfolk Park at Park Grange Road/Beldon Road replaces
the old shopping parade at Park Grange Drive by using part of a Housing Area,
formerly occupied by a tower block and maisonettes, close to the central tram
stop serving the neighbourhood. The proposal in the neighbourhood masterplan
was to rebuild the existing centre with its main aspect towards Park Grange Road
but the new location arose out of later decisions to reorganise local primary
schools which removed much of the footfall from that area. A new health centre
has subsequently been built at the Park Grange Road/Beldon Road site and a
Cabinet approved planning brief is being used to procure new retail development
to complete the Neighbourhood Centre. See the retail allocation referred to as
Beldon B (Site P00328) at paragraph 5.5. The new location is both more visible
for passing trade and highly accessible as it adjoins the central tram stop serving
the area.
4.111 A new centre at Duke Street reflects the shops and services that have developed
in this area over time, and reinforces the hub and node promoted in the City Road
NDF to serve Park Hill and the wider residential neighbourhood.
4.112 The boundary of all other neighbourhood centres remains unchanged from that
shown on the UDP.
Sustainability Issues
4.113 In general sustainability terms, the provision and safeguarding of local facilities
will reduce the need for local residents to travel long distances to access facilities.
Each centre is also upon or near (within 600m of) a high frequency bus route or
Supertram stop, providing access to facilities for those people living further away
from the centres. New centres in Wybourn and Norfolk Park will help to provide
some local jobs.
Equality Issues
4.114 The provision of some localised shops and services will assist groups with poor
mobility and poor access to private transport (which will benefit young people).
Although the range of goods in Neighbourhood Centres is less than at District
Centres, Neighbourhood Centres still provide local convenience goods and some
localised employment of benefit to the local area.
- 193 -
Consultee Preferences
4.115 No representations have been made with respect to the Neighbourhood Centre
designations for existing centres. At Preferred Options stage Sport England
suggested that the site allocation underpinning the new centre at Park Grange
Road/ Beldon Road should be accompanied by an assessment covering the
implied loss of a small children’s playground 253. This was unnecessary as the
play facility had already been reprovided in Norfolk Heritage Park.
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.116 Neighbourhood Centre designations will be used in conjunction with policy C4
‘Development in District and Neighbourhood Centres’ to ensure that existing A1
shops and community facilities are safeguarded within these areas.
Development Management will play an important role in ensuring that the balance
of uses within each centre is sustainable. The Neighbourhoods Background
Report sets out how applications for development in Neighbourhood Centres will
be assessed.
4.117 At Wybourn, the Neighbourhood Regeneration team will support the adoption of
a new urban square as a long term vision as part of the redevelopment of
housing plots alongside Manor Oaks Road. Several plots have already been
cleared, and a Children’s Centre has already been constructed. Remaining plots
will be occupied by neighbourhood facilities, including shops, when plots are
redeveloped.
4.118 At Park Grange Road/Beldon Road the Primary Care Trust has already built a
new health facility within the proposed centre and the Council will dispose of the
remaining land primarily for retail use on the open market in accordance with an
approved planning brief.
4.119 The consolidation of Neighbourhood Centres in the defined areas will ensure that
the centres being safeguarded are sustainable areas for the implementation of
preferred uses under policy H1.
Flexibility and Risk
4.120 The centres now designated are expected to be able to sustain 6 or more retail
units over the plan period given present lifestyles and travelling patterns. Where
new or expanded centres are indicated this is on the basis that market demand
will also improve as housing regeneration gathers pace in those neighbourhoods.
253
Preferred Options ID 1760
- 194 -
4.121 The menu of uses for designated centres allows a broad range of other
complementary uses, provided the preferred A1 and D1 uses remain in the
majority along the street frontage.
4.122 In new centres where market demand is slow to respond it may be necessary to
compromise on the form of new retail investment perhaps allowing one or two
units to meet needs, rather than several smaller outlets.
Monitoring
4.123 The mix and dominance of uses within these Policy Areas will be reassessed as
part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is provided in
the Neighbourhoods Background Report.
Conclusions on the Soundness of the Neighbourhood Centre Policy Area
4.124 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
4.125 It is positively prepared:
•
It clearly identifies a robust distribution of centres across this area for
everyday shopping needs fulfilling the policy requirement to support viable
centres.
4.126 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives already in the Core Strategy
relating to Local Centres (CS39 paragraph 4.100).
•
It delivers on local policy to maintain centres that support the vision of
successful communities (paragraph from 4.101).
•
It is the best approach as theses centres already exist, or can be created,
in focal locations at the heart of reasonable catchment areas.
4.127 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as these are existing centres and
there are reasonable grounds for considering that they can be sustained
(paragraph 4.116).
4.128 It is consistent with national policy:
•
In playing a social role in sustainable development by helping to deliver
sufficient community, cultural facilities and other services to meet local
needs (paragraphs 17 and 70).
- 195 -
•
In helping to define a network and hierarchy of centres resilient to future
economic change (paragraph 23).
University and College Areas
4.129 The rationale for University/College areas is set out in the Economy and City
Region Background Report.
4.130 There is only one University and College Area at Castle College in the
Arbourthorne Ward. Recent modernisation and renewal has taken place and the
site now represents the consolidated Central Campus for Sheffield College.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.131 This area designation complies with the core planning principle of supporting
strategies to improve health, social and cultural wellbeing for all and delivers on
the objective of providing sufficient community, cultural facilities and services to
meet local needs, NPPF paragraphs 17, and 156.
Core Strategy and other strategies or policies
4.132 The designation helps to identify one of the College’s core teaching locations in
the City which allows it to consolidate and expand its operations in a similar
fashion to the two universities in line with policy CS20 ‘The Universities’ 254.
Justification
4.133 The UDP does not express a preference for particular uses in this area through
its designation as part of a Business:Institution:Leisure Area. The College has
subsequently consolidated on the southern half of its original campus spanning
Granville Road (the vacated northern half is proposed as a housing allocation
under Site P00204, see paragraph 5.63) and this needs to be reflected in how the
area is to be designated.
Alternative Options
4.134 In view of the significant investment that the College has made in this location it
was not appropriate to consider alternative designations to the one now
proposed. Given its relationship to the City Centre and other named locations,
strategic policies CS3 ‘Locations for Office Development’ and CS15 ‘Locations for
254
Core Strategy, page 55
- 196 -
Large Leisure and Cultural Development’ do not include this as an area that
should be promoted for either large-scale offices or leisure uses. Furthermore
there have been no alternatives proposed during consultations on this document.
Sustainability Issues
4.135 In general terms the area is well located to serve a major community facility (D1)
and research and development activity, given its excellent access to regular rail,
tram and bus services.
Equality Issues
4.136 The area designation is beneficial for young people because of the emphasis on
training and the high level of accessibility the site has for public transport. New
buildings present on the site afford good access for disabled people and the
current education institution is supportive to cultural minority groups.
Consultee Preferences
4.137 There were no comments submitted for this area during the consultation process.
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.138 The principal preferred uses already exist across this area and there is no
indication that the College is likely to review the role that this site plays in its
accommodation strategy. The policy area designation will be used for
Development Management purposes to ensure that the preferred uses remain
dominant in line with policy H1. The Economy and City Region Background
Report sets out how applications for development in University and College
Policy Areas will be assessed.
Flexibility and Risk
4.139 There is a very low risk that the desired land use character will not be sustained
given the substantial investment that the College has made in this area. Should
some elements of the campus become surplus to education/research needs
during the currency of the Plan the policy area designation would allow a range of
compatible uses, including housing, without affecting the essential character of
the area.
Monitoring
4.140 The mix and dominance of uses within the University and College Policy Areas
will be reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information
is provided in the economy and City Region Background Report.
- 197 -
Conclusions on the soundness of the University and College Policy Area
4.141 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
4.142 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets the need to allow Sheffield College to consolidate teaching
accommodation and any research operations on their existing Central
campus whilst supporting other compatible uses should that prove
necessary (paragraph 4.133).
4.143 It is justified:
•
It is the only realistic option for the area that is consistent with the Core
Strategy’s approach to the location of major institutions and large scale
office and leisure developments (paragraph 4.132).
•
It is needed to deliver the strategic objective of providing land for
education/training facilities to help develop a skilled workforce.
4.144 It is effective:
•
The designation will be effective during the plan period as the College
have already invested heavily in renewing the campus and so has little
incentive to review its use of this location (paragraph 4.134).
4.145 It is consistent with national policy:
•
It helps deliver locally on provision of important community infrastructure in
line with the requirements for plan-making (NPPF paragraphs 17 and 156)
and the evidence base for such infrastructure (paragraph 162).
Housing Policy Areas
4.146 The Housing Areas within the South East Urban Area are the most extensive type
of land designation, and are spread throughout the area
4.147 As outlined in Chapter 1, much of the Manor Castle and Arbourthorne Wards
have been extensively masterplanned under the former Transform South
Yorkshire Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder and earlier initiatives. The key
aims and objectives were to rejuvenate the housing market in this part of the City.
This is primarily being done by regeneration and renewal of the area. Several
site allocations are proposed in line with the NDF and Master Plans, some of
- 198 -
which have implications for the extent of the Housing Area boundary in terms of
taking in some additional land formerly in Open Space Areas in the UDP.
4.148 The remainder of the area in the Richmond Ward and the south eastern part of
the Darnall Ward is a stable and long standing residential area.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.149 This policy area designation conforms to and contributes towards the delivery of
the NPPF as its plays a ‘social role’ in sustainable development. It helps to
safeguard land for housing over the longer term and enables redevelopment sites
to meet housing land supply requirements. This is reinforced further through the
housing site allocations. See NPPF Core Planning Principle number 6. ‘Delivering
a wide choice of high quality homes’.
Core Strategy
4.150 The overall approach to the location of land for housing follows from the spatial
strategy with its focus on development in the main built-up area of the city. Core
Strategy policy CS23 ‘Locations for New Housing’ supports new housing
development concentrated where it would support urban regeneration and make
efficient use of land and infrastructure. The provision of a Housing Area
designation for cleared sites in Manor Castle and Arbourthorne Wards will
support Housing Market Renewal strategies, by preferring housing
redevelopment within these sites, creating opportunities to diversify the housing
stock and to provide housing to meet local demands for larger family houses
(identified by the Housing Market Assessment 255).
4.151 Policy CS25 ‘Priorities for Releasing Land for New Development’ 256 prioritises
housing development within the former Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder
areas. Development preferred through Housing Area designations in Manor
Castle and Arbourthorne Wards will support this policy.
Other strategies or policies
4.152 The majority of the South East Urban Area (except Handsworth and Richmond)
was covered by the former Housing Market Renewal initiative, as the Area was
recognised as having housing market weakness. The masterplans (Norfolk Park
Regeneration Plan, the Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne Master Plan and
the Manor and City Road NDFs 257) provide the spatial framework for improving
255
Sheffield Housing Market Assessment, DCA, 2007; page 157. A copy is available to view from the
Forward and Area Planning Team.
256
Core Strategy page 65
257
For more detail on Masterplans, see from paragraph 1.75.
- 199 -
the housing market and the definition of the Housing areas reflects their
proposals. These master plans helped form the basis of funding used to help
clear sites and attract development interest, and are still being used to bid for
HCA Affordable Homes Programme funding to deliver social housing on specific
sites. They are also being used to guide the Sheffield Housing Company in
developing its land package across the area, and other private developments in
the area.
Manor Castle Ward
Justification
4.153 The vast majority of the built-up area of Manor Castle Ward is designated as a
Housing Area. This area is predominantly residential, with the type and age of
stock largely consisting of inter-war social housing stock built along the principles
of the garden city movement. Some older housing stock exists on City Road and
to the north of Norfolk Park, along with more modern housing in Castlebeck and
maisonettes close to Park Hill (some of which have been demolished for
redevelopment). Park Hill flats exist to the north-west of the area, and are
currently being refurbished. The Housing Area designation will help to maintain
the existing built environment, and will support the redevelopment of housing
sites proposed in the NDFs, which will improve the visual environment of the area
and aid regeneration, helping to meet the requirements of Core Strategy policies
CS23 and CS25.
Alternative Options
4.154 There are no reasonable alternatives, as these areas have already been
extensively master planned and housing need is the main focus.
4.155 The existing UDP designation for the majority of the built-up area is Housing Area
and the equivalent Local Plan policy (H1) continues the approach of housing as
the preferred use in such areas supported by a range of other compatible uses.
4.156 There have been changes to the Housing Area. Some Housing Area has been
added at Castlebeck on the corner of Danewood Avenue and Castlebeck
Avenue, from a previous Open Space Area. This site is surplus to open space
requirements in the area, and includes an already constructed electricity
substation. Its incorporation into the area for housing use is mentioned in the
Manor NDF, which is a material consideration. Some Housing Area has also
been added at Cricket Inn Road in line with the approved Masterplan. This was
previously Open Space Area along the frontage; but had little intrinsic value.
Surplus Open Space has also been changed to Housing Area in line with
approved masterplans and NDFs to enable new housing developments at
Ravencarr Road, Manor Park Avenue, Wulfric Road, Fretson Road, and
Motehall Road/ Harborough Avenue.
- 200 -
4.157 An additional Housing Area is also proposed at the Castle College site,
previously a Business: Institution: Leisure Area in the UDP. This area is very
accessible, next to a Supertram stop and the boundary of the City Centre, and is
in a sustainable location for residential development. The owners of the site are
keen to redevelop the area for housing, as identified in their responses to
previous landowner consultation. There is no prospect of the site being reused
for educational purposes given the distance of the area from the university
campuses, and the investment of Sheffield College in an alternative site. As a
result, designation as a University and College Area would be inappropriate as it
would require 50% of the area to be used for research and development and/or
community facilities associated with educational uses.
4.158 An additional Housing Area is proposed at a site next to Skye Edge Park, off
Blagden Street and Fitzwalter Road, designated in the UDP as a Business
Area. See Paragraph 4.11 in the Business Area section for details.
4.159 An additional Housing Area is proposed at Maltravers Road that was previously
part of the Fringe Industry and Business Area under the UDP. This change has
been proposed to reflect the changing nature of the area, as the land in question
has been the subject of pre-application discussions for residential use and a
planning application is soon to be submitted.
4.160 An additional Housing Area is proposed at Southend Road where the UDP Local
Shopping Centre is no longer required, and also as Duke Street (Park Hill)
where the centre is being consolidated further up Duke Street in line with the City
Road NDF.
4.161 A strip of land at Hyde Park Terrace, land at Beaumont Close and land at
Manor Park (Manor Park Drive) has been changed to Open Space Area to
reflect the green space on the ground.
Sustainability Issues
4.162 There are several housing allocations proposed within Manor Castle Ward. Of
these, all of them are within 600m of either a medium or high frequency bus route
or Supertram stop, providing good access to public transport, reducing the
reliance of new residents for private transport. The frequency, though not high, is
adequate and satisfies the requirements of policy C1 ’Access to Local Services
and Community Facilities in New Residential Developments’. Several sites are
also in close proximity of the Supertram.
4.163 Every site is within 600m of either a District Centre or a Neighbourhood Centre,
which will provide localised shops reducing the need for residents to use private
transport to access top-up shopping. Access to open space and other facilities
such as ATMs, churches and primary schools is also very good for all sites.
- 201 -
4.164 More generally, the majority of the Housing Area enjoys good access to public
transport. High-frequency bus routes along City Road and through Wybourn
serve the Manor Castle Area, in addition to a Supertram Station at Manor Top.
4.165 New housing in this area may put pressure on the capacity of local schools but it
is expected that this can be resolved through management of available places
across the wider area, and if necessary through future Community Infrastructure
Levy funding.
Equality Issues
4.166 The good public transport access available for the majority of allocation sites will
ensure that new housing in the majority of sites here will be suitable for residents
without access to private transport, including young people. The densities
allowed at allocation sites close to the City Centre, such as at Park Hill, will also
provide homes of a suitably small size for young people and the elderly who do
not require family housing. The proximity of new sites to shops and services will
also ensure that people’s access to services will not be constrained by their
potential access to private transport.
4.167 The Manor NDF highlights concern that parts of the area suffers from above
average unemployment figures. However, improvements to the Business Park at
Castlebeck, mentioned at paragraph 4.7 above, and good access to public
transport (described at paragraph 4.162 above) will mitigate these effects.
Consultee Preferences
4.168 No consultation comments have been received with regards to the Housing Area
designations within Manor Castle ward.
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.169 Development of housing will be predominantly infill and/or redevelopment of
cleared sites from the former Transform South Yorkshire Housing Market
Renewal Pathfinder area It will be undertaken by the private sector and on
specific sites by the Sheffield Housing Company (see chapter 1 paragraph 1.85),
and will be assessed in the Development Management process with the support
of planning and design briefs to guide development. The Neighbourhoods
Background Report sets out how applications for development in Housing Policy
Areas will be assessed.
Flexibility and Risk
4.170 Given the need for housing in this ward and the delivery arrangements being
used by the Sheffield Housing Company on particular sites, there is very little risk
- 202 -
that undeveloped land will need to be considered for uses that threaten the
principal housing function proposed in this policy designation. Residential
neighbourhoods in the remainder of the ward are relatively stable, so again the
risk of not maintaining the preferred uses in the designated area is slight.
4.171 The policy area designation has some flexibility to allow other non-preferred uses
that encourage a mixture of uses and help to retain vibrant communities and a
sustainable pattern of development that reduces the need to travel.
4.172 Risks predominately relate to the economic climate and site specific conditions.
The need for housing prevails, so it is envisaged that the sites will be developed
within the plan period, although current demand and site constraints may result in
some sites being delivered later than initially expected when the Core Strategy
was prepared. However, other uses would still not be appropriate and there is a
large long-term need for housing so the designation is appropriate even if the
preferred use on new sites takes longer to be realised.
Monitoring
4.173 The mix of uses and dominance of uses within Housing Policy Areas will be
reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is
provided in the Neighbourhoods Background Report.
Arbourthorne Ward
Justification
4.174 Preferred residential class uses in policy H1 already cover most of the land not
judged to have separate value as open space in the Norfolk Park, Arbourthorne
and Gleadless neighbourhoods. Apart from the resiting of the Norfolk Park
shopping centre referred to in paragraph 4.110, in general there are limited
grounds for departing from the extent of similar designated areas set out under
equivalent UDP policy H10. Therefore, only minor changes have been made to
Housing Area and Open Space Area boundaries as a result of completed
developments (Myrtle Road) more detailed masterplanning of Norfolk Park (Park
Spring Drive, Kenninghall Drive and linear spaces alongside Park Grange Road
and St. Aidan’s Road) and to reflect reconfiguration of school sites with playing
fields where rebuilding has taken place (Norfolk Park and Arbourthorne primary
schools and the Park Academy).
Alternative Options
4.175 There are no realistic alternatives to these residential designations given the
extent of detailed masterplanning which has firmly established where housing
should be retained, and where it should be replaced with new housing. All
designated Housing Areas lie within the urban area of the City defined for the
- 203 -
purposes of policy CS23 and are therefore expected to continue contributing
significantly to the available housing stock.
Sustainability Issues
4.176 The Housing Area contains some 10 housing site allocations concentrated in the
Norfolk Park and Upper Arbourthorne neighbourhoods. The appraisals for those
sites demonstrate beneficial use of previously developed land and excellent
access to regular public transport services, especially the tram. The Housing Area
has good social and physical infrastructure and where, (as in the case of
shopping facilities for the northern part of Norfolk Park) this is currently lacking,
the Plan addresses this issue. Although the Lower Arbourthorne and Gleadless
neighbourhoods contain no housing site allocations, they both share the positive
attributes referred to above. The site appraisals accept that new housing may put
pressure on the capacity of local schools but it is expected that this can be
resolved through management of available places across the wider area and
through Community Infrastructure Levy funding where still necessary for housing
development to be permitted.
Equality Issues
4.177 Most of the Housing Area is beneficial for younger residents and those without
the use of private transport, owing to good accessibility to regular public transport
services. Much of the designated area is convenient for shops and services and
parts of it are located close to employment opportunities available in the City
Centre and the Sheaf Valley
Consultee Preferences
4.178 No comments have been raised about the extent of the proposed Housing Area
during consultation stages.
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.179 The preferred residential class uses (C2 and C3) already exceed the dominance
level set out in policy H1 for this designated area. The planned development of
new housing on allocated ‘brownfield’ sites across the ward will help to maintain
this dominance. Planning briefs for appropriate sites will reinforce the promotion
of preferred residential uses. The policy will assist the approval of preferred uses
and rejection of unacceptable industrial uses via the Development Management
process.
- 204 -
Flexibility and Risk
4.180 Given the need for housing in this ward and the delivery arrangements being
used by the Sheffield Housing Company there is very little risk that undeveloped
land will need to be considered for uses that threaten the principal housing
function proposed in this policy designation. Residential neighbourhoods in the
remainder of the ward are relatively stable, so again the risk of not maintaining
the preferred uses in the designated area is slight.
4.181 The policy area designation has some flexibility to allow other non-preferred uses
that encourage a mixture of uses and help to retain vibrant communities and a
sustainable pattern of development that reduces the need to travel.
Monitoring
4.182 As paragraph 4.173
Darnall and Richmond Wards
Justification
4.183 In the Darnall Ward a Housing Area is located on the eastern side of Handsworth
Road, between the main road and the areas of Green Belt that form the boundary
with Rotherham. It is a longstanding and well established residential area, with
new housing still under construction at Quarry Road
4.184 The vast majority of the built-up area of Richmond is designated as Housing
Area. This area is predominantly residential, with the type and age of stock
largely consisting of either inter-war social housing stock for example at the
Woodthorpe estate, or private inter-war housing to the south of the
neighbourhood in Intake, and along Richmond Road. A small modern housing
estate of detached houses and apartments lies off Richmond Road to the north
east of the ward. The ward is not within a Housing Renewal Area.
Alternative Options
4.185 Generally the Housing Area designation now shown for the Darnall and
Richmond areas is the same as that shown on the UDP. No alternatives were
proposed because these are stable housing areas and little change is likely to be
needed.
4.186 In the Richmond ward, the Housing Area to the north is extended at Pickard
Drive, which was originally designated as Green Belt. CS71 ‘Protecting the
Green Belt 258 states that changes can only be made to the Green Belt boundary
in order to remove untenable anomalies. In this case, a housing estate has been
258
Core Strategy, page 127
- 205 -
constructed as redevelopment of the former Stradbroke College site. The
development was allowed in the Green Belt on the basis that the amount of built
land would remain the same as when the college buildings existed. The Green
Belt as shown on UDP now no longer reflects uses on the ground. The change
corrects an anomaly where retention of a Green Belt boundary could place
unnecessary development restrictions on the houses here.
Sustainability Issues
4.187 Both allocated sites within this area record all positive impacts for housing use,
being well located with good access by public transport, and within walking
distance of local facilities.
4.188 In general, the majority of this area has good access to high-frequency public
transport routes, including the Supertram, providing access to employment and
leisure facilities in the City Centre. This area is also within walking distance
(600m) of Manor Top District Centre or Darnall District Centre. As such, housing
here does benefit from sustainable links to existing services and public transport,
reducing the need for residents to have to use private transport. The northern
part of the Richmond ward only has access to medium frequency bus routes, with
service frequencies of every 15 to 20 minutes, which makes the existing housing
here slightly less sustainable, with residents more likely to use private transport.
However, this is a very well established residential area, still having adequate
public transport, and it would be unreasonable to propose an alternative policy
area designation here. There are six Neighbourhood Centres that serve the area,
providing facilities for local communities. In addition, open spaces are plentiful,
and include Richmond Park.
Equality Issues
4.189 There are no significant equality issues within the housing areas, as the majority
of the area is well located with good access by public transport, and within
walking distance of local facilities.
Consultee Preferences
4.190 No consultation comments have been received with regards to the Housing Area
designations within Darnall and Richmond Wards.
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.191 Implementation of the preferred and acceptable uses in the policy area would be
primarily by the Development Management process. As the entire Housing Area
is established, little development is expected, maintaining the status quo. Infill
development is expected, but will be relatively small-scale, limited to the size of
- 206 -
existing housing plots in the area. The Neighbourhoods Background Report sets
out how applications for development in Housing Policy Areas will be assessed.
Flexibility and Risk
4.192 Residential neighbourhoods in these wards are relatively stable; the risk of not
maintaining the preferred uses in the designated area is slight. Provided that
housing remains the dominant use there is flexibility for other acceptable and
complementary uses to come forward where appropriate in line with policy H1.
Monitoring
4.193 As for paragraph 4.173
Conclusions on Soundness of Housing Policy Areas
4.194 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
4.195 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed development requirements for the future
supply of housing.
•
It provides a solid background for enhancement of areas currently
experiencing housing market weakness (paragraph 4.152).
•
It helps guide the recycling of previously developed land and other windfall
sites to maximise supply of new housing.
•
It provides a strong strategic basis for any Neighbourhood Plans,
masterplans and any associated compulsory purchase action (paragraph
4.152).
4.196 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives primarily CS23 ’Locations for
New Housing' and CS25 ‘Priorities for Releasing Land for New
Development’ (paragraph 4.150).
•
It is the most appropriate use as the majority of the area has been
extensively masterplanned.
4.197 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period because residential use classes
already predominate and there is little risk of this position not being
- 207 -
maintained and new housing opportunities are set out in the site
allocations, (see Chapter 4 and paragraph 4.192)
•
It provides scope to allow development of unforeseen complementary uses
such a new primary school.
4.198 It is consistent with national policy:
•
Consistent with NPPF Core Planning Principle number 6. ‘Delivering a wide
choice of high quality homes’. It identifies where housing should be the
dominant land use and has site allocations that will deliver new properties.
Central Housing Area
4.199 A Central Housing Area is proposed to the north west of the Manor Ward,
alongside the Sheffield Parkway. The area presently encompasses a large
office and residential development to the north, with older-style terraces used as
shops, business units and apartments to the south. To the south is a housing
area. A business area lies on the opposite side of the Parkway at Victoria
Quays. Open Space flanks the area to the east and west. Under the UDP this
was a Mixed Use Area.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.200 Similar to the Housing Area designation this area performs a social role in
sustainable development. Furthermore, in line with paragraph 50 of the NPPF it
helps meet the need for a range and mix of house types that meet the
demographic needs of today and the future, market trends, and the needs of
different groups. In particular the area is suited to apartments, and student
accommodation.
Core Strategy
4.201 Policy CS27 ‘Housing in the City Centre’ 259 promotes housing development in
Castlegate and Victoria Quays, which neighbour the policy area. Additional
housing on this site, therefore, would complement the neighbouring City Centre
development.
4.202 Policy CS3 ‘Locations for Office Development’ promotes office development in
accessible locations at the edge of the City Centre. This area, although not within
259
Core Strategy, page 68
- 208 -
the City Centre itself, is on the boundary and has good pedestrian links to the
Centre.
Justification
4.203 Towards the south of the site, there are some brownfield sites interspaced
between terraced retail and business units. The area designation will allow for
these sites to become developed when market conditions recover, with the
preferred housing uses complementing the existing uses and other compatible
employment uses in the area.
Alternative Options
4.204 The area is situated next to the Sheffield Parkway and the busy Park Square
roundabout. Housing uses as preferred within a Housing Area (with at least 70%
of the area in residential use) would be inappropriate for these particular locations
due to the noise and pollution nuisance these bad neighbours create. Office uses
would be appropriate there as they would be less susceptible to the neighbouring
nuisance, as their design would allow for non-opening windows and internal
environmental systems. However, the area neighbours a Housing Area to the
south, parts of which are less susceptible to traffic nuisance, and suited to
residential use. A Central Housing Area designation would allow for both types of
development as appropriate. Of note, a recent development within this area has
incorporated a mix of office and residential uses, with offices sited in the parts of
the site more sensitive to nuisance from the Parkway. The Policy Area
designation will support the development of similar office/residential mixed use
schemes, and reflects existing development on the ground.
4.205 Designation of this area as a Business, Business and Industrial or Industrial Area
to complement the growth of employment in the wider area was considered.
However, it would attract levels of traffic, potentially including freight that would
cause nuisance for the residents of the neighbouring Housing Area to the south.
Other Planning Justification
4.206 Neighbouring residential areas in Manor do suffer from above average levels of
unemployment, as identified in the Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne
Masterplan 260 and NAO 261 data showing deprivation levels in Manor Ward. The
greater scope for employment uses in the area could help to offset this.
Sustainability Issues
4.207 In general terms, the area is within 400m of the Supertram stop at Sheffield
Station. Park Hill is also within walking distance (800m) of the main railway
260
261
Wybourn, Manor Park, and Arbourthorne Masterplan. page 6
Neighbourhood Statistics, Office of National Statistics, 2007.
- 209 -
station and bus interchange. As a result, the area is a highly sustainable location
suited to both future office and housing development. It will allow for future
employees of any office development here to access the area without needing to
use private transport, whilst residents in the area will also benefit from good
access to both the services of the City Centre and transport links to the wider city,
reducing the reliance upon private transport.
Equality Issues
4.208 The proximity of the area to the City Centre and good quality public transport
would allow for smaller high-density units, providing homes for people not in
families, such as young adults and the elderly. Office jobs will be easily
accessible by people without their own transport (especially of benefit to many
young people).
Consultee Preferences
4.209 No consultee comments have been received with regards to this policy area.
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.210 The designation of the area as a Central Housing Area will allow for a number of
residential and employment uses, and will offer a range of development
opportunities in a location where demand is likely to be relatively high.
Flexibility and Risk
4.211 This policy area enables a relatively high degree of flexibility and will allow the
economic climate to determine future development/ use. Housing only needs to
cover a minimum of 30% of the area and the rest could be employment uses
should they be needed.
Monitoring
4.212 As for paragraph 4.173
Conclusions on Soundness of Central Housing Policy Area
4.213 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
4.214 It is positively prepared:
•
It helps meet the need for residential and employment uses in this part of
the City which is highly accessible, allowing a degree of flexibility to
accommodate changing market demand over time (paragraph 4.203).
- 210 -
4.215 It is justified:
•
It is the most appropriate when considered against the reasonable
alternatives, as it allows for a mix of compatible uses next to a Housing
Area and the City Centre.
4.216 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period due the existing nature of the area
and its very accessible location (paragraph 4.210).
4.217 It is consistent with national policy:
•
Consistent with NPPF Core Planning Principle number 6. ‘Delivering a
wide choice of high quality homes’, and consistent with NPPF policy to
deliver employment and residential uses in highly accessible locations
where there is an identified need (paragraph 17).
Flexible Use Area
4.218 Within the South East Urban Area Flexible Use Areas are located:
•
In Manor Ward, at Wybourn along Cricket Inn Road and adjacent to the
Business and Industry Area, at Manor Farm, and at City Road around the
entrance to Manor Fields open space area.
•
In the Arbourthorne Ward at the northern end of East Bank Road and a
section of City Road between Craddock Road and Eastern Avenue
•
In the Richmond Ward at the corner of Mansfield Road and Woodhouse
Road, and at Manor Top.
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.219 These Flexible Use Areas, with a range of housing-compatible uses and no one
preferred use, specifically support the ninth Core Planning Principle at paragraph
17, promoting mixed use developments and encouraging multiple benefits from
the use of land. It is also consistent with the requirement to identify priority areas
for economic regeneration (paragraph 21).
- 211 -
Core Strategy
4.220 At Manor Top, Core Strategy policy CS38 ‘Manor Top District Centre’ supports
the renewal and possible expansion of the District Centre. Sites along City Road
and at the Territorial Army Centre at Manor Top offer an opportunity for the
development of a variety of uses that may support the District Centre, as will sites
along City Road. The City Road NDF 262 also identifies the potential of these
sites for a variety of purposes, but not for a District Centre designation, which
would allow large scale retail uses. This is referred to in the District Centre
section above at paragraph 4.72.
4.221 Core Strategy policy CS9 ‘Attercliffe/Newhall and Parkway/Kettlebridge’ supports
the development of traditional and modern manufacturing within the Parkway and
Kettlebridge areas, which includes land at Manor Way/Cricket Inn Road. A
Flexible Use Area designation will allow for small-scale manufacturing and
business uses that will complement the aims of this policy, whilst not allowing for
larger scale industrial uses that would conflict with existing housing uses to the
south.
Manor Castle Ward
Justification and Alternative Options
4.222 At Manor Way/Cricket Inn Road, the area neighbours a Business and Industrial
Area to the north, and Housing and General Employment Areas to the south. A
Flexible Use Area designation is proposed, as the area is suitable for a variety of
uses and this could form a small opportunity area. At present, unoccupied sites
in the area are unattractive and discourage investment. Increasing planning
possibilities for future use will support the economic development of this area.
This area was previously designated as a Business Area under the UDP.
However, this is no longer appropriate as greater flexibility is required to enable a
mix of uses to meet local demand. A Business Area could possibly be restrictive
over the longer term as the emphasis would be on employment uses and
residential (C3 use) in particular would be limited to 40% gross floor area. A
Flexible Use Area on the other hand, would enable a mix of uses including
residential and compatible uses but without any specific thresholds. A Housing
Area has not been considered as an appropriate use, as this would also be
restrictive and result in a loss of a small opportunity area that is being promoted
here.
4.223 Manor Farm presently comprises of a mix of small scale office, business,
residential and community uses, with no one dominating. It is next to Open
Space and a Housing Area. A Flexible Use Area designation will allow for the
further consolidation of the mix of uses on this site which provides some local
skills and training in association with the aims of Housing Market Renewal
262
City Road Neighbourhood Development Framework, pp. 35-36.
- 212 -
initiatives. Open Space Area, the designation in the UDP, is now inappropriate
as the area does not serve an open space function.
4.224 At City Road the site covers an area that is already a Mixed Use Area under the
UDP; this should remain flexible to accommodate a range of uses compatible
with the Housing Area. The City Road NDF 263 and Manor NDF 264 both identify
the need for the improvement of the built environment near to Manor Top, which
currently consists of sites that are underused. A Flexible Use designation will
reduce the land use restrictions on these sites, and will encourage their
redevelopment. In particular, at this location, the City Road NDF highlights this
area as a ‘priority action area’ where the entrance to the Open Space Area
should be remodelled to form an effective gateway. This would reinforce the
upgrade of Manor Fields Park into a District Park, as it would promote
redevelopment to include a new park office with café, exhibition and learning
area. New housing or other community uses could also be created overlooking
the park to create natural surveillance and contribute towards the regeneration
efforts at the park. A Housing Area designation would not afford the flexibility
required to support the regeneration aspirations in this key area of change; as
residential uses would be the preferred use.
Arbourthorne Ward
Justification and Alternative Options
4.225 The western section of the City Road designation covers virtually the same area
designated as a Mixed Use Area under UDP policy MU2. The area contains
some isolated shops, social clubs and other amenities, but has no distinctive land
use character. A Flexible Use Area with no preferred use, but housingcompatible, responds well to the supportive role identified for this zone in the City
Road NDF. Whilst the opportunity is being taken to improve ‘place-making’ by
enhancing certain nodes, there is no need for retail uses to predominate along
this section of City Road as they should at the centres at either end of the corridor
at Manor Top and Duke Street. With suitable noise mitigation the area can
accommodate a broad range of non-industrial uses, including housing, to add to
the vitality of adjoining residential neighbourhoods.
4.226 The East Bank Road area consists of a mix of commercial and former education
uses. Although designated as a Business Area in the UDP, favouring B1 uses,
such a zoning is no longer consistent with Core Strategy policy CS3’Locations for
Office Development’ which aims to concentrate office use in the City Centre and
accessible locations at its edge. The area does contain a potential development
site at a former special school, but a Flexible Use designation can provide
sufficient guidance to achieve a suitable non-industrial use should it be brought
forward for development during the plan period. Provided suitable noise
263
264
City Road NDF, pages.27; 35-36
Manor NDF, page .21
- 213 -
mitigation measures are used there is no longer a case for discouraging
redevelopment for housing purposes in this area, as was the case with the
approved UDP policy.
4.227 No reasonable alternatives have been advanced for alternative designations for
the City Road or East Bank Road locations, as flexibility over land uses is still
desirable, and these areas do not already exhibit predominantly retail, residential
or industrial character.
Richmond Ward
Justification and Alternative Options
4.228 A site on the southern boundary of Manor Top is identified as suitable for
proposed redevelopment for a variety of uses that may support the neighbouring
District Centre and its renewal. A variety of uses are identified as suitable,
including residential, retail and leisure. The owners of the Territorial Army Centre
are keen to redevelop the site, and the designation will offer a variety of
acceptable uses to promote small scale retail, leisure and residential uses that
would complement the neighbouring District Centre. The City Road NDF 265 and
Manor NDF 266 identify the need for the improvement of the built environment near
to Manor Top, which currently consists of sites that are underused. A Flexible
Use designation will reduce the land use restrictions on these sites, and will
encourage their redevelopment. See also paragraph 4.86 Manor Top District
Centre.
4.229 Although Core Strategy policy CS38 promotes, where possible, the expansion of
Manor Top District Centre, paragraph 4.78 explains that this is dependent on the
local transport network being able to accommodate such a large scale of
development, without adversely impact upon public transport services or causing
an unacceptable increase in delays for general traffic movement.
4.230 The Manor Top Feasibility Study (2007) undertook modelling that concluded that
a large superstore development on this site would have significant disbenefits to
traffic movement through this key intersection, and in particular would be very
disruptive to tram journeys without expensive redesign including re-alignment of
tram tracks. The modelling included testing for the impacts of different road
layouts, with similar results. Although discussions have taken place between
highways advisors for both the Council and the developer, a suitable way forward
has not been identified to mitigate highways concerns, and nothing has been
produced that would change the stance that a large supermarket could not be
accommodated (in highway capacity terms) at this site. Designating the
Territorial Army site as part of the District Centre on the Proposals Map would
prefer delivery of retail uses (that could include a supermarket) which would be
265
266
City Road Neighbourhood Development Framework, pages.27; 35-36
Manor Neighbourhood Development Framework, page.21
- 214 -
misleading, as it is unlikely that such development could be successfully
delivered, see also paragraph 4.84.
4.231 The proposed area at Mansfield Road/Woodhouse Road encompasses a
mixture of retail units and small businesses which previously formed part of the
Intake Neighbourhood Centre which sprawled around the junction of Mansfield
Road and Woodhouse Road. A Neighbourhood Centre designation would require
over 50% of units to be in retail A1 use, which would make the occupation of
some empty units here difficult to achieve, as already fewer than 50% of uses
here are for A1 uses. The area is very close to, and to some extent
overshadowed by, the Manor Top District Centre. Consolidation protects the
most viable and thriving parts of the centre for local communities. The separation
of the Flexible Use Area will allow a wider range of new uses to come forward,
bringing empty units back into use, without requiring retail as a preferred use. At
the same time it would not preclude edge-of-centre development to support the
centre if this was appropriate and viable. The uses that are acceptable in Flexible
Use Areas would be compatible with the neighbouring Housing Areas.
All Wards
Sustainability Issues
4.232 In general sustainability terms, the areas are all close to (within 400m of) or lie
upon high frequency bus routes or Supertram stops. As such, any new facilities
provided in these areas will be very accessible, reducing the need for users to
use private transport. Each area is within 600m of an existing Neighbourhood
Centre, and potential users will have good access to local top-up shopping
facilities. Some empty and underutilised sites exist in all the areas, with the
exception of Manor Farm, and flexibility will encourage their productive use. City
Road and East Bank Road areas are within a reasonable distance of a District
Park which would benefit any new residents in those areas.
Equality Issues
4.233 In general equality terms, the areas could provide benefits to local unemployed
people if used for employment. If used for housing, the areas will be suitable for
people without access to private transport (being within 400m of high frequency
public transport routes). The area at City Road could be developed at a medium
residential density and provide small-scale units suitable for both young and older
people.
Consultee Preferences
4.234 With the exception of Manor Top there has been no consultation response on the
Flexible Use Areas.
- 215 -
4.235 Consultation responses at various stages of the document have raised objections
to the Flexible Use designation of the Territorial Army site to the south of Manor
Top District Centre. A retailer, seeking to develop a supermarket on the site,
considers that the area should be designated as part of the District Centre in
order to specifically support the aims of Core Strategy policy CS38, and this view
was supported by the landowner at the landowner consultation 267. The reasons
for not accepting this are set out above at paragraph 4.228.
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.236 Market forces will determine the next stage of development within Flexible Use
Areas, with Development Management playing an important role. The
Neighbourhoods Background Report sets out how applications for development
in Flexible Use Policy Areas will be assessed.
4.237 At Manor Farm, the area is already largely developed. However, the policy area
designation will allow for continued small scale expansion to the facilities of the
farm, in accordance with what are understood to be the intentions of the site
owners.
4.238 Development of the Manor Top area will be pursued by private developers. It is
known through Private Landowner consultation that the owners of the site are
seeking redevelopment of the site. Although a large scale supermarket would be
unviable for reasons discussed above, the designation as a Flexible Use Area will
allow the TAVR site owners to redevelop the site with a mix of acceptable uses,
which may include smaller scale retail, leisure and residential development.
4.239 At Mansfield Road/Woodhouse Road, the Flexible Use Area designation will
increase the opportunities, allowing for empty units to be re-used for non A1
uses, helping to increase the investment potential in buildings here.
Flexibility and Risk
4.240 The flexibility of the area will enable a range of developments over time to
respond to the needs of the area and changing market circumstances and
demand. There is also a minimal risk of planning requirements delaying
development.
Monitoring
4.241 There are no requirements to maintain dominance for particular uses in these
areas, however, the mix and dominance of uses within Flexible Use Policy Areas
267
Preferred Options ID 1432 (Tesco), 1467 (RFCA (TA) Yorkshire & Humber
- 216 -
will be reassessed as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information
is provided in the Neighbourhoods Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Flexible Use Areas
4.242 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
4.243 It is positively prepared:
•
It adheres to the plan-making requirement in national policy to promote
development and flexible use of land (NPPF paragraph 156).
•
It assists the market to bring forward development in these opportunity
areas without prescriptive constraints on land use.
4.244 It is justified:
•
Because none of the areas exhibit distinctive land use characteristics that
might warrant an alternative designation requiring one or more preferred
uses.
•
It supports elements of more detailed masterplanning across the wider
area (paragraph 4.220).
4.245 It is effective:
•
As there is no need to promote particular types of development there is
little risk of failing to deliver the policy over the plan period.
4.246 It is consistent with national policy:
•
As it adheres to the core principle of promoting mixed use developments
(paragraph 17).
•
It avoids unnecessarily designating these areas entirely for employment
uses which allows alternative uses to be brought forward in response to
market signals (paragraph 22).
Open Space Area
4.247 Several open space areas exist within the South East Urban Area, ranging from
District Parks to smaller local parks and informal open space. The main District
Parks include Norfolk Park, and Manor Park. Smaller areas of open space help
to foster green links, several of which cross the South East Urban Area and
provide wildlife corridors across the city.
- 217 -
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.248 This Policy Area conforms to and contributes towards the delivery of the NPPF as
it performs an ‘environmental role’ in sustainable development. In particular it
relates to ‘contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural environment and
improving biodiversity’. It directly links with Section 8 of the NPPF ‘promoting
healthy communities’ (paragraph 73), where access to high quality open space
and opportunities for sport and recreation make a clear contribution to the health
and well being of communities. Paragraph 74 specifically states that open space
should not be built on unless an assessment indicates that its surplus to
requirements.
Core Strategy
4.249 Core Strategy Objective 7 is to have ‘A city that prizes, protects, and enhances its
natural environment and distinctive heritage and that promotes high quality
buildings and spaces’ 268. The identified Open Space Areas include natural and
landscape features and wildlife habitats.
.
4.250 Policy CS45 ’Quality and Accessibility of Open Space’ 269 states that safeguarding
and improvement of open space will take priority over creation of new areas, so it
is important that areas, especially those that are above the 0.4 hectare threshold
and locally valued, such as the community parks, are identified on the Proposals
Map.
4.251 Core Strategy policy CS47 ’Safeguarding Open Space’ 270sets out the criteria to
consider whether open space is surplus, and supports the safeguarding of
existing open space. The policy only allows for development on open space
where equivalent or improved open space can be provided elsewhere; or the site
is surplus to its open space function; or if the development is ancillary to the open
space area.
4.252 Policy CS73 supports the maintenance and enhancement of the Strategic Green
Network in Sheffield and Open Space Areas have been designated to help define
and safeguard these.
Other strategies or policies
4.253 The City Road NDF places a great emphasis on the Manor Fields Open Space
Area as key asset for the local communities that need to be preserved and
268
Core Strategy, paragraph 3.4, page 13
Core Strategy, page 87
270
Core Strategy, page 89
269
- 218 -
enhanced in terms of actual on-site provision and its visibility/ entrance onto City
Road. This area is designated accordingly.
4.254 The Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne Master Plan promotes Skye Edge,
Manor Oaks, Corker Bottoms and Arbourthorne Recreation Ground as
significant community assets that need to be enhanced and made more
accessible and these are also designated.
4.255 The South Sheffield Manor NDF focuses attention on the Woodthorpe Ravine as
a key asset and specifically promotes adjacent development on the Manor
Gateway site to utilise this. This is reflected in the designation of a further Open
Space Area.
4.256 Finally the Norfolk Park Regeneration Plan proposed augmenting some linear
open spaces alongside East Bank Road, Park Grange Road and St. Aidan's
Road and these are now reflected in Open Space Area designations.
Justification
4.257 The South East Urban Area benefits from an extensive network of existing formal
and informal open space, of varying degrees of historic, ecological and
recreational value. Some important recreation areas lie within the Green Belt in
this area (see paragraph 4.273), but others consist of formal parks such as
Norfolk Heritage Park, Manor Park, Skye Edge, Hollinsend and
Arbourthorne Recreation Grounds, or other important greenspaces and
woodland such as Black Bank, Buck Wood, Gleadless Common, Clay Wood,
Jaunty Park and Seagrave Road, Woodthorpe Ravine, and Corker Bottoms.
In addition, the City Road Cemetery, and Intake Cemetery occupy a significant
proportion of formal open space. These spaces are all shown as Open Space
Areas to ensure their retention.
4.258 At Handsworth an Open Space Area is shown at the rear of the new housing site
at Quarry Road. This confirms the extent and boundary of a local open space
which acts as a barrier between the housing area and the Green Belt beyond.
4.259 The designation of Open Space Areas is in part to promote biodiversity and the
aims of the Council’s Nature Conservation Strategy. Several of the Open Space
Areas form green link routes across the South East Urban Area and form a
network of nature corridors and linked open space areas. This includes the
strategic green corridor stretching from Gleadless Valley to the City Centre which
connects Buck Wood, Black Bank, Norfolk Heritage Park and Clay Wood. A
more local network links Gleadless Common, Arbourthorne Recreation
Ground, Manor Fields, Manor Wood and Corker Bottoms. Several similar
routes exist across the South East Urban Area, and the maintenance of the Open
Space Areas ensures that these corridors are maintained. Desirable additional
links are also proposed as part of some housing site allocations (see Site P00330
- 219 -
Daresbury Drive, paragraph 5.187, and Site P00434 Berners Road, paragraph
5.195).
4.260 Some of the Open Space Areas have proposed boundary changes in line with
approved Master Plans and NDFs or school playing field reconfigurations (see
Housing Area section paragraph 4.174 above for details).
Alternative Options
4.261 The policy area designations largely confirm the extent and boundaries of existing
local open spaces and recreation grounds within the South East Urban Area.
Open Space Areas are shown in a way that directly complies with the
requirements of the Core Strategy. An Open Space Area is the only meaningful
designation for existing District and Local Parks because these contribute
significantly to the area’s character. Other pockets of land are useful local Open
Space Areas or necessary green links having recreational, nature conservation or
amenity value. Within the context of Core Strategy policy there were no
meaningful options as other urban designations would impair the value of these
spaces and/or sever important green corridors.
4.262 The boundary changes at Alison Business Centre and housing development sites
reflect the master plan and NDFs (see sections on Business Area paragraph 4.8
and Housing Area, paragraph 4.156).
Sustainability Issues
4.263 The Open Spaces are located within the communities they serve, and form part
of a green link that acts as a biodiversity corridor. They provide opportunity for
wildlife to thrive and opportunity for recreation supporting objectives for a healthy
community.
Equality Issues
4.264 Open Spaces distributed across the area are particularly beneficial to residents
with dependent children, those with poor access to private transport, young
people and those suffering ill-health.
Consultee Preferences
4.265 No consultee comments have been received regarding the location of Open
Space Areas in this area and the option of identifying formal Local Green Spaces
in line with national policy has not been taken up thus far.
- 220 -
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
4.266 Implementation of change within the Open Space areas would be primarily by
the Development Management process using polices CS47 and CS73 ‘The
strategic Green Network’ 271 and G1 ‘Safeguarding and Enhancing Biodiversity
and Features of Geological Importance’ 272 where appropriate. It is expected
that the Open Space areas will change and adapt over time in line with their local
value and use. There is a risk that maintenance of recreation space may be
reduced or withdrawn, and as a result an open space becomes less attractive
and run down. CS47 specifically deals with safeguarding open space and
contains specific criteria to determine whether an open space is truly redundant.
Development proposals involving the loss of identified open space will be
assessed against the provisions of this policy.
Monitoring
4.267 Open Space Assessments, carried out as part of the Development Management
Process, will identify where development may affect provision of Open Space in a
local area. The extent and value of Open Space Policy Areas will be reassessed
as part of future reviews of the Local Plan. Further information is provided in the
Opportunities and Well-being Background Report.
Conclusions on Soundness of Open Space Areas
4.268 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
4.269 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed infrastructure requirements to provide areas
of open space to meet the recreation needs of people living or working in
the area.
•
It supports the continuation of existing and locally valued areas for their
recreation and/or wildlife value.
4.270 It is justified:
•
271
272
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives for safeguarding open space
already in the Core Strategy specifically policy CS47 ’Safeguarding Open
Space’ (paragraph 4.266).
Core Strategy, page 130
City Policies and Sites , page 71
- 221 -
•
It is the most appropriate given that generally these areas already exist and
are identified for protection, (paragraphs 4.257).
4.271 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period as these are existing open space
areas and they are expected to continue.
4.272 It is consistent with national policy:
•
It identifies areas of open space to be safeguarded from development
consistent with NPPF Objective 8 ‘Promoting healthy communities’. This
sets out the importance of access to high quality open spaces and
opportunities for sport and recreation (paragraph 73). Paragraph 74
protects existing open space where it is needed.
Countryside Areas: Green Belt
4.273 There are three main areas of Green Belt within the South East Urban Area. In
the Darnall and Richmond Wards, these are to the east of Castlebeck including
Bowden Housteads Wood, and to the west of Richmond, including Richmond
Park. The boundary of the Green Belt also includes land alongside the A57 and
at Handsworth in the Darnall Ward, the area to the east of Quarry Lane, adjacent
to the City boundary with Rotherham, is Green Belt. Generally the boundaries of
Green Belt areas shown on the proposals map are largely the same as those
already adopted in the UDP. Some minor anomalies are addressed at paragraph
4.277
Consistency with National Policy and Other Strategies
National Policy
4.274 NPPF Objective 9 ‘Protecting Green Belt land’ sets out the continued importance
of the Green Belt and sets out the reasons for including land within it. It also
establishes that Green Belt should be reviewed only in exceptional circumstances
and then through the preparation or review of the Local Plan (paragraph 83). The
boundary will be reviewed when the Core Strategy is reviewed as part of the
forthcoming Local Plan review, but in the meantime would pre-empt choices that
should be made on a more comprehensive and strategic basis.
Core Strategy
4.275 Policy CS71 ’Protecting the Green Belt’ states that Countryside and other open
land around the existing built-up areas of the city will be safeguarded by
- 222 -
maintaining the Green Belt, which will not be subject to strategic or local review.
It identifies exceptional standards, where the boundary may be reviewed to
remove untenable anomalies. Those identified in the South East Urban Area are
listed below at paragraph 4.277.
Justification
4.276 All of these Green Belt areas are currently designated as Green Belt in the UDP
and perform the Green Belt functions, in particular of preventing settlements from
merging and halting any encroachment of development into the open countryside.
The fundamental characteristic of the Green Belt is its openness. Within this area
areas of Green Belt extend out to the edge of the city area, and form important
green links to the countryside beyond. Some parts of these areas have a
relatively steep topography, and contain important cycle and walking routes.
Development of these areas would be contrary to policy CS71. Due to its
location within the South East Urban Area designation as Green Belt area also
discourages development of land that would be difficult to develop sustainably.
4.277 Some changes to the Green Belt boundary are identified, these are:
•
West of Stradbroke School, Richmond - this removes a small area from
the Green Belt that originally followed a boundary that no longer exists.
This area is now part of the landscaped garden area for the flats on
Stradbroke Road from the Green Belt, and creates a revised boundary that
can be seen on the ground.
•
Pickard Drive - this is a modern housing estate built as part of the
redevelopment of the former Stradbroke College site. An area is removed
from the Green Belt, see paragraph 4.186 . This removes an untenable
anomaly.
•
East of Castlebeck Avenue, Manor and between 17 and 19 Danewood
Avenue, Manor - This completes the inclusion of the whole of the Bowden
Housteads Local Nature Reserve within the boundary of the Green Belt.
•
Saxonlea Avenue, Manor - This adds an area into the Green belt and
now shows the whole of the recreation ground within the Green Belt and
creates a sensible boundary on the ground.
•
Willow Avenue, Handsworth - This removes an area of existing
residential development from the Green Belt and creates a boundary that
can be seen on the ground.
Alternative Options
4.278 No other meaningful options arose, in keeping with Core Strategy policy CS71.
- 223 -
Sustainability Issues
4.279 The addressing of the boundary anomalies above has no sustainability
implications.
Equality Issues
4.280 No equality issues arise from the change to the boundary detailed above.
Consultee Preferences
4.281 No consultee comments have been received with regards to the proposed Green
Belt designations in this area.
Effectiveness
Delivery
4.282 Development Management will assist in protecting the Green Belt area from
undesirable development. Further information on Green Belt policy areas is
provided in the Character and Heritage Background Report.
Flexibility and Risk
4.283 There are no issues of flexibility and risk with the Green Belt designation here.
Monitoring
4.284 There are no formal points for monitoring this policy area.
Conclusions on Soundness of Countryside Area Green Belt
4.285 The policy area designation here is considered sound for the following reasons.
4.286 It is positively prepared:
•
It meets objectively assessed reasons for inclusion of land within the
Green Belt and confirms its permanence.
4.287 It is justified:
•
It is needed to deliver Local Plan objectives for safeguarding land in the
Green Belt already in the Core Strategy specifically policy CS71’Protecting
the Green Belt’ , (paragraph 4.276).
- 224 -
•
It is the most appropriate given that generally there areas already exist and
are confirmed for protection, and it addresses an untenable anomaly at
Pickard Drive (paragraph 4.277).
4.288 It is effective:
•
It is deliverable over the plan period because this area already exists and is
performing a Green Belt function and they are expected to continue as
such.
4.289 It is consistent with national policy:
• The area defined as Green Belt is consistent with the purposes of including
land especially those parts of the area which lie on the Sheffield/
Rotherham boundary and help to keep the two settlements distinct, (NPPF
paragraph 80).
- 225 -
5
South East Urban Area Allocated Sites
Introduction
5.1
Most of the sites proposed for allocation in the City Policies and Sites document
are safeguarded for one, or sometimes more than one, required use. A few sites
are allocated where uses would be determined through the policy area
framework. In these cases flexibility is considered more desirable than certainty
about a required use. The general reasoning for this is briefly summarised in the
City Policies and Sites document. This chapter provides further background on
individual sites. All allocations are subject to the provisions of citywide policies
and criteria set out in the Core Strategy and City Policies documents, see Policy
J1 and paragraph 12.12 in the City Policies and Sites document. This document
refers to the evidence that is distinctive to the site or its area.
5.2
Evidence is provided in respect of one Retail Site and 31 Housing Sites within
this sub-area.
Allocation Type – Retail
Introduction
5.3
This is currently the only site specifically promoted for new retail development
within the centres in this sub-area. It is designed to fill a gap in the network
arising from the decline of the local centre that formerly served the Norfolk Park
estate.
5.4
This retail allocation helps deliver a new Neighbourhood Centre for Norfolk Park
located off Park Grange Road which is the spine route through the area. Cross
references will be made to relevant evidence already set out in the section
covering the generic designation for Neighbourhood Centres.
P00328 Beldon Road, Norfolk Park
National Policy and Other Strategies
5.5
The main connections between national policy and the Core Strategy for this type
of allocation have already been set out in paragraphs 4.98 – 4.100 in respect of
Neighbourhood Centre designations. National policy (paragraph 23) specifically
requires Local Plans to allocate a range of suitable sites to meet the scale and
type of retail development needed in centres. It also advocates that planning
policies should promote a mix of uses in large scale residential developments like
the Norfolk Park project so that key facilities, such as local shops and health
- 227 -
facilities are sited within reasonable walking distance of most homes (paragraph
38).
5.6
One of the key objectives of the Norfolk Park Regeneration Plan 273 was to create
a high quality community and business facilities centre with a range of shops and
services to replace the obsolete shopping parade at Park Grange Drive.
Justification and Options
Alternative Options
5.7
Paragraph 4.110 sets out the background to how the location of the new Norfolk
Park Centre was chosen and the qualities the site has in terms of visibility and
accessibility for potential users. It also refers to the progress made in approving a
planning brief that helped to shape the design of a new health facility that will
anchor the Neighbourhood Centre. The same brief establishes the desired scale
and form of retail and complementary residential development to create a strong
centre for the surrounding catchment area. Property advice was taken on the
commercial viability of the retail proposals contained in the brief.
5.8
In line with best practice it was recognised that an element of residential
development would help to bolster the vitality of the centre and also provide a
degree of natural surveillance of the area outside of normal trading hours.
Therefore the only meaningful land use option, aside from leaving this ‘brownfield’
site vacant, was around different mixes of the two principal uses on this site.
5.9
The prime need is to provide replacement retail facilities of an appropriate scale
to serve the regeneration project in this area. Sustainability appraisal has
informed the desired balance between shops and houses to complement the
modern health centre that is currently being constructed on adjoining land. Both
retail and housing have positive impacts for most of the sustainability objectives.
Family housing as an option does register some negative impacts related to
probable slight increases in air pollution (through greater use of private vehicles)
and a stretching of the capacity of local schools. There are larger sites allocated
exclusively for new housing in the rest of the immediate catchment area (see
paragraph 5.187 below) so on balance it is reasonable to require that the
principal use should be retail development. A small element of housing can be
justified in assisting with centre vitality provided it is located above or behind the
shopping frontage. This is consistent with shops being preferred before housing
in a Neighbourhood Centre in line with policy H1.
Justification for Conditions
5.10
273
Three conditions are specified in this site allocation. Condition (1) requires the
retail element to be of an appropriate scale to serve the neighbourhood. This is to
See paragraph 1.87
- 228 -
ensure the commercial viability of new facilities without harming higher order
centres that serve a wider catchment with superior accessibility for a range of
transport modes.
5.11
Condition (2) requires the housing element to be located above or behind the
shopping frontages because this arrangement is better for complementing the
main commercial function of the centre. It will also ensure compliance with
policies C4 ‘Development in District and Neighbourhood Centres’ and H1 on
restricting housing on shopping frontages.
5.12
Finally Condition (3) requires the retention of a group of (poplar) trees at the
northern edge of the site because of their landscape and conservation value to
the area.
Sustainability Issues
5.13
The site warrants development for the required uses because they both perform
positively overall. Retail development has benefits of providing jobs in the
regeneration area and minimising travel for shoppers in the immediate catchment
area. Both uses can take advantage of excellent access to public transport
services with stops for trams and buses located nearby. They can both make
productive use of ‘brownfield’ land and existing infrastructure such as the Central
District Heating scheme.
5.14
Residents would also have excellent access to facilities in Norfolk Heritage Park
and the new health centre once it is completed. Family housing on this site may
stretch the capacity of local schools but, as in neighbouring areas it is expected
that places can be provided for by management of places and, if necessary, with
money from the Community Infrastructure Levy.
Equality Issues
5.15
Housing on this site could benefit people with low access to private transport and
the new shops proposed would allow most groups to walk to facilities and thus
save money and time in travelling to one of the nearest alternative centres. The
proximity of tram and bus stops would benefit those groups requiring a high level
of personal safety outside their homes. Local jobs in new shops could help
improve matters for people with low incomes.
Consultee Preferences
5.16
274
At Preferred Options stage Sport England 274 asked that the site allocation should
take account of a small children’s playground that has subsequently been
removed. This matter had already been addressed as the play facility had been
reprovided nearby in Norfolk Heritage Park.
Preferred Options reference 1760
- 229 -
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
5.17
The City Council approved a planning brief and market brief (2008) that has led to
the development of a new health centre on land immediately adjoining this site.
Prior to the Primary Care Trust committing to that scheme, that land was also
included in the Neighbourhood Centre designation and was a site allocation
during earlier stages of preparing this plan. The remaining land at Beldon Road,
(measuring 0.88ha), will be disposed of on the open market using the above
guidance once Sheffield Housing Company’s programme has developed a critical
mass of new housing in the neighbourhood. Completion of development is
therefore estimated to be in the medium term (by 2021).
5.18
There is a drain located in the centre of the site that may need to be diverted to
achieve a better layout but this would not be a significant constraint to delivering
the development.
5.19
The City Council has consulted property advisers who maintain that retail
development in this location will be commercially viable. However there may be a
risk that the market will not respond to this opportunity on the basis of the current
brief, particularly in respect of the option of a vertically mixed development of the
two uses. If market demand is slow to respond it may be necessary to
compromise on this design requirement and perhaps the form of retail investment
by allowing one or two larger units to meet needs rather than insisting on several
smaller outlets.
Monitoring
5.20
Monitoring will be done through Sheffield Housing Land Availability Assessment
(SHLAA) and the Development Management process. The Council’s
Regeneration Team working in partnership with Great Places will also monitor
progress to ensure that the project is successfully delivered.
Conclusions on Soundness of Retail Allocation
5.21
Taking into account the evidence set out above the allocation of this site for retail
and complementary housing uses is considered sound for the following reasons.
5.22
It is positively prepared:
•
Such an allocation is a central part of maintaining a positive vision for the
City and for the Norfolk Park neighbourhood in particular (paragraphs from
5.7).
- 230 -
•
5.23
5.24
5.25
It provides clarity for decision-makers on what should be permitted on this
site in line with the plan-making requirements set out in national policy
(paragraphs 154 and 157).
It is justified:
•
It has been informed by an approved planning brief that proposes the
stated mix of uses (paragraph 5.17).
•
The site is suitably located for new retail development because it is focal to
a catchment area now lacking alternative facilities.
•
There are no compelling reasons to use the site for other purposes and it
helps implement strategic policy on Neighbourhood Centres (CS39) in
respect of the Norfolk Park area.
It will be effective:
•
It is free from major constraints and market interest should mean that it is
developed during the plan period (paragraph 5.19).
•
There is some flexibility to incorporate non-retail uses in line with the site
allocation requirements and policies J1 and H1.
It is consistent with national policy:
•
It accords with principles of promoting mixed use developments and
delivering sufficient community facilities (paragraph 17).
•
It ensures an integrated approach to regeneration and helps to create a
healthy community by delivering a strong Neighbourhood Centre
(paragraphs 69 and 70).
•
It bolsters the vitality of a centre through allocating land in a creative way
to meet local needs (paragraph 23.
•
It supports sustainable transport by promoting local shops to serve a large
scale residential redevelopment project (paragraph 38).
- 231 -
Allocation Type – Housing
Introduction
5.26
Housing uses are the main land use for, the Manor Castle, Arbourthorne and
Richmond wards, and the south eastern part of the Darnall ward. . The majority
of housing areas are in established residential areas, and only small changes are
proposed to the boundary of the housing areas in the UDP (See Chapter 4
Housing Policy Areas, paragraph 4.146)
5.27
There are several housing allocations in the Manor Castle and Arbourthorne
wards, in line with approved Neighbourhood Development Frameworks and
Masterplans.
5.28
The masterplans identify that there is a need for larger family housing across the
South Area Development Framework (ADF) area which all the site allocations will
potentially address by encouraging the construction of new housing that will
include a mix of home sizes (see Chapter 1 paragraph 1.75).
5.29
Due to existing high levels of social housing (identified in the Wybourn, Manor
Park and Arbourthorne Masterplan; page 5; and Manor Neighbourhood
Development Framework; page 71) there is also a need to diversify the tenure in
the area, to create more mixed communities. Therefore, private housing is
needed in this area. New affordable housing should be from the intermediate
market, as this will diversify the stock from the high numbers of social rented
currently in the area.
5.30
There is also one Housing Site allocation in each of the Richmond and Darnall
wards.
National Policy and Other Strategies
5.31
All of the proposed housing site allocations conform to the NPPF and Core
Strategy Policies set out in Chapter 4 Housing Policy Areas, see from paragraph
4.146 full details.
Manor Castle Ward
Sheffield Housing Company sites
•
•
•
•
•
•
P00439 Scotia Drive
P00205 Claywood Tower Block
P00208 Fretson Road
P00210 Harborough Avenue/ Rise
P00212 Manor Gateway
P00214 Manor Park Avenue
- 232 -
•
•
P00217 Wulfric Road
P00223 Stonecliffe Road
Justification and Alternative Options
Options
5.32
No alternative options have been considered for these sites as the allocations
directly relate to the area based Master Plan and Neighbourhood Development
Frameworks that have undergone several rounds of consultation and are
approved as material considerations by Cabinet. Chapter 1 has demonstrated
that housing is key priority for the regeneration/ renewal of the area, see from
paragraph 1.75. Most of the sites have also been cleared as part of past
regeneration efforts, and have been held specifically to be redeveloped for new
housing of different types/ tenures; that will contribute towards tackling current
housing market weaknesses throughout the area.
Justification for Conditions
5.33
There are some site specific conditions for some of the proposed allocations as
follows:
P00439 Scotia Drive
Condition(s)
Reason for condition(s)
(1) Development to be
designed to overlook
Manor Fields Park.
This site presents an opportunity for a new housing
development to look onto the Open Space Area,
and in doing so redress the lack of natural
surveillance. Extensive master planning of the area
has highlighted that although the open space is a
key community asset it is not well used. One of the
main problems is poor natural surveillance,
resulting in a fear of crime and safety concerns.
The Manor Neighbourhood Development
Framework promotes development on this site to
link in better with the open space.
(2) Physical access to
be created to the Park if
feasible.
People are also deterred from using the open space
by a lack of visible and accessible entrances from
the adjoining residential neighbourhood. A new
entrance, if feasible, could help contribute towards
the open space becoming more accessible.
- 233 -
P00439 Scotia Drive
Developer Implications
These conditions will have an impact on design and costs.
Working to these should, however, have a positive impact on the new
development. CABE has demonstrated through its research and best practice
(i.e. ‘Start with the Park’) that well used open space has a positive effect on
the attractiveness and image of new development and subsequent values 275.
Delivery
As this is a Sheffield Housing Company site, the Council will prepare a
Planning and Design Brief setting out the site specific requirements. This will
be used by the Sheffield Housing Company to guide design development from
the outset, and will be used as key tool by the Council through the formal
Development Management pre-application process and application processes.
P00205 Claywood Tower Block
275
Condition(s)
Reason for condition(s)
(1) Open space required
to the west/ south west of
the site.
A strip of land to the west/ south west of the site
was previously considered for designation as an
Open Space Area, to safeguard the views to/ from
the Cholera Monument and its Grounds.
However, part of the site accommodates District
Heating pipes, and this is likely to affect the
developable area. A degree of flexibility is
required to enable a viable development on this
site, so a condition for the provision of some open
space has been proposed as an alternative. A
fixed area of land has not been marked out, as it is
acknowledged that the extent and layout of the
open space needs to be an integral part of the
design of the development.
(2) Landscape
improvements to
neighbouring open space
including improved
pedestrian routes
This is required to enhance the setting of the
Listed Cholera Monument and its Grounds, and to
complement the delivery of the Green Link that
connects Sheaf Valley Park to the Cholera
Monument and Grounds, and beyond to Norfolk
webarchive.nationalarchive/www.cabe.org.uk/files/start-with-the-park.pdf
- 234 -
P00205 Claywood Tower Block
between Sheaf Valley
Park and Cholera
monument.
Park Heritage Park.
(3) Safeguarding the
setting of the Cholera
Monument and the
Grounds and Norfolk
Road Conservation Area
This site adjoins the Listed Cholera Monument
and its Grounds and the Norfolk Road
Conservation Area and any new development
needs to be sensitive this heritage setting.
English Heritage has commented on this
allocation (see paragraph 5.39 below) and this
condition has been applied to reinforce
Development Management policies.
Developer Implications
Condition (1) will have an impact on design and costs. However, there is a
degree of flexibility with this condition, as opposed to having an open space
land use designation that would fix an approximate area to be safeguarded.
Condition (2) will have a financial implication
Condition (3) will have an impact on the design and costs but this should not
be onerous, as this will relate to general design development issues regarding
layouts, height, scale, massing, landscape setting, and materials. All of which
would apply to a certain degree anyway, due to the prominent nature of this
site at the edge of the City Centre.
However, overall, there is potential for these conditions to contribute towards a
well designed development that integrates and utilises the network of green
spaces. Resulting in an attractive development that has higher sales values;
as demonstrated by CABE through its research and best practice. (See
P00439 above).
Delivery
All of the Sheffield Housing Company sites will have the same delivery
mechanism for its conditions, see P00439 above for details.
P00210 Harborough Avenue/ Rise
Condition
Reason for condition
Green Link to be created
to the Open Space Area.
The site presents an opportunity for a new
housing development to integrate with the Open
- 235 -
P00210 Harborough Avenue/ Rise
Space Area. Extensive master planning of the
area has highlighted that although the open space
is a key community asset it is not well used. One
of the main problems relates to poor entrances.
The Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne
Master Plan confirms this, as it identifies it as a
key redevelopment site that will help improve both
the residential offer and the open space area. A
specific link has not been marked out, as the
extent and layout of it needs to be an integral part
of the design of the development.
Developer Implications
The condition will have an impact on design and costs.
Working with to this condition should have a positive impact on the new
development. CABE has demonstrated through its research and best practice
(See P00439 above) that well used open space has a positive on the
attractiveness and image of new development and subsequent values.
Delivery
All of the Sheffield Housing Company sites will have the same delivery
mechanism for its conditions, see P00439 above for details.
P00212 Manor Gateway
Condition
Reason for condition
Green Link to be created
to reinforce the Green
Network and improve
access to Woodthorpe
Ravine.
The site is next to the Woodthorpe Ravine Open
Space and needs to be integrated with it as a key
community asset. Links also need to be made to
other open spaces to encourage wider use of the
green network and enhance biodiversity/ ecology
in the area. An Open Space Area designation
has not been proposed within the site as some
flexibility is needed to ensure that it forms an
integral part of the design of the development.
The extent will need to be discussed with the
Council at the early stages of design
development.
- 236 -
P00212 Manor Gateway
Developer Implications
As P00210 above.
Delivery
All of the Sheffield Housing Company sites will have the same delivery
mechanism for its conditions, see P00439 above for details.
P00214 Manor Park Avenue
Condition
Reason for condition
Safeguarding the setting
of neighbouring heritage
sites including Manor
Lodge and City Road
Cemetery
This site is adjacent to the City Road Cemetery
and Listed Manor Lodge and any new
development needs to be sensitive to this setting.
English Heritage has commented and this
condition has been applied to reinforce
Development Management Policies, see
paragraph 5.39.
Developer Implications
This condition will have an impact on the design and costs. However, a well
designed scheme could take advantage of this historic setting.
Delivery
All of the Sheffield Housing Company sites will have the same delivery
mechanism for its conditions, see P00439 above for details.
Sustainability Issues
5.34
Overall, all of the sites have a positive performance as they are brownfield sites,
so established infrastructure and utilities can be used. Being part of the Housing
Renewal Area creates opportunities for a mix of types and tenures to meet the
needs of the area. The sites are close to a range of community assets that
include Open Space Areas and Neighbourhood Centres. The public transport
network is also accessible from all of the sites, although this varies from site to
site in terms of distance to high and medium frequency routes.
- 237 -
5.35
Family housing on these sites will stretch the capacity of local schools but this
issue can be resolved through the distribution and management of capacity at the
time, also taking account of other changes in the distribution of demand. Where
this is not possible the Community Infrastructure Levy might be used to fund
provision for development that would otherwise have to be refused because of
lack of school capacity.
5.36
There are however. some site specific issues as follows:
Site
P00205 Claywood
Tower Block
P00214 Manor
Park Avenue
Sustainability Issue
Design and conservation
issues with the Cholera
Monument, its Grounds and
the Conservation area.
Design issues that relate to
the setting of the Grade II
Listed Manor Lodge and the
Historic Cemetery.
Proposed mitigation
Condition placed on
development, see
paragraph 5.33
Condition placed on
development, see
paragraph 5.33
Part of the site is greenfield
(previously open space
land) and an element of
new infrastructure/ utilities
will be required.
Equality Issues
5.37
Housing on these sites would benefit people with low access to private transport
as the public transport network is accessible with a range of high and medium
frequency bus routes and the Supertram. They will be suitable for a range of
people including the young and elderly as they will be able to access local
amenities, and a range of house types/ tenures that suit their needs.
5.38
The Sheffield Housing Company also has its own equalities impact assessment.
It states that it will endeavour to demonstrate best practice in its processes and
its completed new homes. In order to achieve this it has in place an Equalities,
Inclusion and Regeneration Strategy. In terms of processes, it will make its best
efforts to reach and include a range of the community, customers and
stakeholder in the design development process through community consultations.
It will also provide opportunities for access to training/ employment through the
construction process. The new homes will increasingly meet potential
requirements of various groups, as they are being built to high specifications
using the BREEAM approach that includes 100% lifetime homes.
- 238 -
Consultee Preferences
5.39
The following comments have been made via consultation at the various stages
of drafting the emerging site allocations and Proposals Map.
Site
Comment
Response
P00205 Claywood
Tower Block
At the Emerging Options
stage 276 English Heritage
stated that any
development on this site
should not detract from the
neighbouring scheduled
monument and the Norfolk
Road Conservation Area.
This was followed up at the
Draft Plan stage (2010) 277,
with a subsequent comment
seeking conditions on
development to enforce the
above.
This will be addressed
through the Development
Management process
and the relevant policies
will apply. A condition
has also been placed on
the allocation to reinforce
this further, see
paragraph 5.33.
P00214 Manor Park
Avenue
At the Emerging Options
stage 278 English Heritage
stated that any
development on this site
should not detract from the
neighbouring Manor Lodge.
At the Preferred Options 279
this was reinforced further
by stating that new
development must protect
the setting. At the Draft
Plan stage (2010) 280 an
amendment to conditions
was sought to enforce the
above.
This will be addressed
through the Development
Management process
and the relevant policies
will apply. A condition
has also been placed on
the allocation to reinforce
this further, see
paragraph 5.33.
At the Emerging Options
stage 281 a comment was
Although the Core
Strategy gives priority to
276
Comment ID 46.034
Comment ID dcps773
278
Comment ID 46.036
279
Comment ID 2169
280
Comment ID dcps774
281
Comment ID 4970.043
277
- 239 -
Site
P00217 Wulfric
Road
P00208 Fretson
Road
Comment
Response
made about the presence of
greenfield land, but it was
acknowledged that it is
incorporated in this
allocation to meet the
strategic housing
requirement.
brownfield land it
acknowledges that some
greenfield development
will still be appropriate.
This area has been
extensively
masterplanned and
through that process it
has been identified that
the greenfield part of this
site does not have other
intrinsic value as open
space, it is well within the
urban area and is able to
make a useful
contribution to meeting
housing needs and
regenerating the area.
At the Emerging Options
stage 282 a comment was
made about the lack of an
Open Space Assessment.
The area has been
extensively master
planned and the open
space issues were
addressed as part of the
Manor Neighbourhood
Development Framework.
At the Emerging Options
stage 283 a comment was
made contesting the
potential for this site to
accommodate an element
of retail within any new
redevelopment.
This site is proposed for
residential redevelopment
in line with the proposals
under the master plan for
the area.
At the Preferred Options
stage 284 a comment was
made by Sport England
stating that any
redevelopment proposals
that affect open space and
recreation facilities should
This issue will be
addressed through the
Development
Management process.
Relevant Policies
including the National
Planning Policy
282
Comment ID 4970.039
Comment ID 5308.043
284
Comment ID 1763
283
- 240 -
Site
P00210
Harborough
Avenue/ Rise
Comment
Response
be considered in the
context of PP17 and other
local/ national policies.
Framework will be
applied.
At the Preferred Options
stage 285 an objection was
received to the potential of
this site being considered
for a car free development.
An opinion was also
presented that the
redevelopment of this site
will not impact on the
bordering ancient
woodlands due to level
differences.
This will be addressed
through the infrastructure
requirements for this site,
which will be less
prescriptive on car free
development, it will
encourage ways to
exploit the transport
connections in the area.
Effectiveness
Delivery
5.40
The Sheffield Housing Company will deliver these sites, with its status of a
Limited Company. Like any other development company it will need to address
development viability issues that include a range of factors including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
5.41
Issues that will specifically affect the Sheffield Housing Company in the Manor
Castle Ward are:
•
•
•
•
5.42
285
costs,
values and phasing
mix and type of development
quality standards (i.e. using BREEAM)
site abnormals
processes (i.e. formal closures/ diversions etc).
housing market needs,
demand
sales values
phasing of new development so that the localised market is not saturated.
The current Sheffield Housing Company programme strategically splits its
package of sites across the North East Urban Area and the South East Urban
Comment ID 1582
- 241 -
Area into 4 phases, to ensure that new housing does not flood the market.
Various strands of work are also ongoing to assess market needs/ demand, and
marketing to ensure the mix of house types and tenures reflects the needs of the
area.
5.43
In terms of site abnormals, the Council as landowner has undertaken site
surveys, and as a Local Planning Authority will be producing planning and design
briefs that will highlight planning policy requirements and site specific issues that
will need to be addressed. This approach will ensure that the Sheffield Housing
Company has the relevant information it requires at an early stage, to inform
design development and subsequent delivery on the ground.
5.44
Site specific details on programming alongside potential constraints and
infrastructure needs are presented below:
Site
Programme for delivery
Site-specific issues
P00439 Scotia Currently programmed for
construction 2019 with
Drive
completion by 2021.
P00205
Claywood
Tower Block
Currently programmed for
construction 2019 with
completion by 2021.
The Sheffield Energy and Water
Infrastructure Study 2010, see
paragraph 3.14, identifies that a
District Heating pipe runs through
part of the site. It is likely that this
may affect part of the developable
area.
Site topography will also need to
be addressed.
P00208
Fretson Road
Currently programmed for
construction 2024 with
completion by 2031 but
available and potentially
deliverable sooner if
market demand increases.
The Sheffield Energy and Water
Infrastructure Study 2010
identified a surface water sewer
as a development constraint likely
to remain in situ.
P00210
Harborough
Avenue/ Rise
Currently programmed for
construction 2017 with
completion by 2021.
Site topography needs to be
addressed.
P00212 Manor Currently programmed for
construction 2020 with
Gateway
completion by 2026.
- 242 -
Site access to Prince of Wales
Road is an issue alongside
potential integration with adjoining
Site
Programme for delivery
Site-specific issues
uses.
The Sheffield Energy and Water
Infrastructure Study 2010
identifies that a significant network
extension will be required for gas.
This entails a connection directly
from the intermediate pressure or
medium pressure network.
P00214 Manor Currently programmed for
construction 2020 with
Park Avenue
completion by 2026.
P00217
Wulfric Road
Currently programmed for
construction 2016 with
completion by 2021.
This site is part greenfield so new
utilities and drainage are likely to
be needed.
There are adopted footpaths
across the site that may require
formal closure and/ or re-routing,
depending on the layout of any
redevelopment proposals.
New utilities and drainage are
likely to be needed on the current
open space land.
P00223
Stonecliffe
Road
Currently programmed for
construction 2025-2029
but available and
potentially deliverable
sooner if market demand
increases.
Site topography needs to be
addressed.
The Sheffield Energy and Water
Infrastructure Study 2010
.identified a BT Openreach cable
as a development constraint likely
to remain in situ.
Flexibility and Risk
5.45
Although there will be a range of risks, the Sheffield Housing Company affords a
greater degree of certainty that these sites will be delivered; due to the
procurement process and business planning. The alternatives would potentially
have greater risks associated with them, as it is likely that there would not be a
package of sites, and all would be subject to individual disposals. This could
result in a range of developer interests that may not necessary have the
appropriate delivery mechanisms and/ or funds.
- 243 -
5.46
Across the sites there is a degree of potential flexibility in phasing, to vary the mix
of sites in any particular phase and/ or their order of start on site. This could
mean that some sites are started and completed earlier than programmed, whilst
others may be deferred. The City Council, as the land owner also reserves the
right to introduce additional land into the package.
5.47
A rigorous procurement process has been undertaken by the Council to select its
partners to form the Sheffield Housing Company and this included financial
modelling. A Business Plan is being used by the Company that sets out a
financial structure and includes calculations for the whole 15-year programme.
As any other Business Plan it will outline what will be built, costs, how it will be
financed and assumptions on sale values over time.
5.48
However, due to the current economic climate the Sheffield Housing Company is
vulnerable to financial pressures and market forces; just like any other
development company. The potential risks are, therefore, similar to any other
developer, and primarily relate to financial viability. Should the Company fail on
financial grounds at any point, this could result in various sites within their land
package not being delivered within the life of the Local Plan. The number and
detail of actual sites would be subject to timing, as there could be various
scenarios whereby some sites are delivered under earlier phases and later
phases are not delivered. Under the Development Agreement, the Council as the
landowner has retained certain safeguards against unforeseen events and poor
Company performance. Where land has been transferred to the Company but it
is not being developed as agreed, the Council has the power of forfeiture under
the terms of the lease proposed. The Council would then need to assess how
development would be achieved on those sites.
5.49
Other risks relate to sales on earlier phases potentially affecting progress on
subsequent phases, if alternative intermediary gap funding is not found to keep
the programme rolling.
5.50
As the Sheffield Housing Company is a major regeneration vehicle for the
Council, and it is a joint partner with Keepmoat Homes and Great Places; there
will be continuous mechanisms to monitor the performance of the Company (see
below). It is anticipated that this process will enable the Council to identify any
issues at an early stage, and work with its partners on risk management and any
mitigation measures; to avoid the Sheffield Housing Company suffering from any
failures.
Monitoring
5.51
These sites will be monitored through Sheffield Housing Land Availability
Assessment (SHLAA), Development Management and the Sheffield Housing
Company’s own project management systems. Under the latter, a number of
performance indicators will be monitored throughout the life of the Sheffield
Housing Company. These are embedded in its:
- 244 -
•
•
•
•
5.52
Regeneration Strategy,
Quality Strategy,
Environmental Sustainability Strategy, and
Equality, Inclusion and Communication Strategy.
It is anticipated that these will monitor not only the number of homes built but also
the wider physical, social, environmental and economic regeneration benefits.
Manor Castle Ward
Non Sheffield Housing Company Sites
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
P00203 Blagden Street
P00204 Castle College
P00206 Cricket Inn Road
P00209 Harborough Avenue/ Viking Lea
P00211 Maltravers
P00213 Manor Community Centre
P00215 Manor 8
P00222 Park Hill Flats phases 2 & 3
P00226 Seaton Crescent
P00228 Skye Edge Avenue
P00230 St Johns School Manor Oaks Road
P00203 Blagden Street
Justification
5.53
286
287
The site is presently in a Business Area. However, housing is more compatible
with established surrounding uses than the existing use and will complement
delivery of housing renewal within the area. The site acquired full planning
consent in 2008 for 39 dwellinghouses and 11 apartments 286. It was consdiered
that residential uses would be more appropriate for the longer term. This was in
line with the City Road Neighbourhood Development Framework 287 that promotes
the removal of obsolete industrial sites to create visual improvements to the area.
This allocation will encourage the redevelopment of an obsolete industrial site,
and will aid this process.
Planning application reference 08/03758/REM
See pages 32 and 46
- 245 -
5.54
Development of housing here will provide approximately 46 residential units
according to the SHLAA 288, which will help meet the housing targets of Core
Strategy policy CS22 ‘Scale of Requirement for New Housing’.
Alternative Options
5.55
No alternative options have been considered as the City Road Neighbourhood
Development Framework comprehensively looked at this area, and considered all
the appropriate alternative uses, including retaining the Business Area. (See
Chapter 4 Business Policy Area, paragraph 4.13, for details of why a Housing
Area is being proposed at this location.)
Justification for Conditions
5.56
No site specific conditions are attached to this allocation.
Sustainability Issues
5.57
The site is within 400m of a high frequency bus route on City Road. The site is
within 400m of a Neighbourhood Centre, consisting of a range of shops and
community facilities. The distances involved will allow for residents to travel to
nearby facilities without having to rely on private means of transport.Capacity of
local schools may be an issue, see paragraph 5.35.
Equality Issues
5.58
Housing on this site would benefit people with low access to private transport as
the public transport network is accessible with a high frequency bus route on City
Road. It will be suitable for a range of people including the young and elderly as
they will be able to access local amenities, and a range of house types/ tenures
that suit their needs.
Consultee Preferences
5.59
At Private Landowner consultation, the owners of the site supported the allocation
to encourage the redevelopment of the site for housing.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
5.60
288
The site is to be developed through a private developer. The site is presently
occupied for business use. The occupier will move before development
SHLAA reference S00112
- 246 -
commences, and will use finances gained from the redevelopment to relocate to
a site more suited to their needs, with better road access.
5.61
The owner of the site has indicated that they are keen to redevelop it. All
conditions have been discharged and the permission has been implemented. It is
anticipated that the owner is awaiting more favourable market conditions to
progress with delivery. It is estimated that development will be complete by 2026.
Monitoring
5.62
This will be monitored through SHLAA and the Development Management
process.
P00204 Castle College
Justification
5.63
Housing is compatible with established surrounding uses and will complement
delivery of housing renewal within the area. The Homes and Communities
Agency has planning approval for 84 dwellinghouses 289.
5.64
The housing allocation here could provide approximately 120 houses according
to the SHLAA 290, which will help to meet the housing target requirements for
Sheffield identified by Core Strategy policy CS22 ’Scale of Requirement for New
Housing.
Alternative Options
5.65
No alternative options have been considered as residential use was the most
appropriate here given its location and immediately adjacent residential
neighbourhood.
Justification for Conditions
5.66
There is one site specific condition to safeguard the setting of the Cholera
monument and the Grounds and Norfolk Road Conservation Area. This has
been applied as the redevelopment of this site needs to be sensitive to the setting
within which it is located.
Sustainability Issues
5.67
289
290
The site is next to an establised residential area, and is within 400m of a
Supertram stop at Granville Road, in addition to being next to a high-frequency
Reference number 12/03953/FUL
SHLAA reference S00709
- 247 -
bus route. The site is within 400m of the City Centre, which provides numerous
facilities and services. The distances involved will allow for residents to travel to
nearby facilities without having to rely on private means of transport.
Development here will also have sustinability benefits in removing a derelict site.
5.68
Capacity of local schools may be an issue, see paragraph 5.35.
Equality Issues
5.69
Housing on this site would benefit people with low access to private transport as
the public transport network is highly accessible. It would be in a suitable location
for smaller accommodation suited to young groups (being on the edge of the City
Centre and suitable for higher density schemes with smaller unit sizes).
Consultee Preferences
5.70
At the Emerging Options stage 291 a comment was made in support of this site on
behalf of the Sheffield College (landowner at the time).
5.71
At the Emerging Options stage 292, a consultation comment from English Heritage
highlighted the need for the site to respect the setting of the nearby scheduled
monument (the Cholera Monument) and the Norfolk Road Conservation Area.
This was later reinforced with a comment at the Preferred Options 293 seeking
mitigation measures and at the Draft Plan (2010) 294 seeking a condition to ensure
the setting is safeguarded. A condition has been applied to the allocation, as
development will need to complement views towards the monument, and be of a
scale in keeping with the neighbouring Conservation Area, see paragraph 5.66.
5.72
At the preferred options stage 295 a comment was made by Sport England stating
that any redevelopment proposals that affect open space and recreation facilities
should be considered in the context of PP17 and other local/ national policies.
This issue will be addressed through the Development Management process.
Relevant Policies including the National Planning Policy Framework will be
applied.
5.73
At the Draft Plan (2010) 296 stage, the Homes and Communities Agency supported
this allocation and indicated that development will be undertaken within the first
five years after the publication of the document.
291
Comment ID 5312.001
Comment ID 46.035
293
Comment ID 2168
294
Comment ID dcps772
295
Comment ID 1769
296
Comment ID dcps270
292
- 248 -
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
5.74
The Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) has been working with the Council’s
Regeneration Team to develop proposals to bring this site forward for
development. A Planning and Design Brief was created to guide the design
development process, and a formal pre-application process has been undertaken
and planning approval acquired subsequently. The HCA has undertaken a
recruitment process for developers to deliver this scheme. A start on site is
expected by June 2013 with a view to completion by early 2016.
5.75
Delivery is tied to the Affordable Homes Programme fund, and the HCA needs to
start on site to ensure the funds are not clawed back.
5.76
The Sheffield Energy and Water Infrastructure Study, (see paragraph 3.14)
identified a BT Openreach cable as a development constraint likely to remain in
situ; it has also highlighted the presence of District Heating Pipes.
Monitoring
5.77
This will be done through the SHLAA and Development Management process.
The HCA has its monitoring mechanisms to ensure that funding requirements are
met.
P00206 Cricket Inn Road
Justification and Alternative Options
5.78
This site sits within an established residential area and the need to retain a
residential designation is set out within the Wybourn, Manor Park and
Arbourthorne Masterplan 297.
5.79
The redevelopment of the site for housing will contribute greatly to the
regeneration of Wybourn and the overall delivery of housing renewal in the area.
It is essential that this site can be developed for housing in order to help restore
the community and support ailing local facilities.
5.80
The SHLAA anticipates that 112 houses can be provided at this site 298. Such
provision would provide houses that would help to meet the housing targets
within CS22 ’Scale of Requirement for New Housing’.
297
298
See Chapter 1 paragraph1.83, and masterplan document pages 73-75
SHLAA site reference S00713
- 249 -
5.81
This site has the opportunity to contribute to the vision for the area which includes
selective redevelopment to provide higher quality housing, including aspirational
housing. The Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne masterplan identifies a
medium demand for the remaining 2 and 3 bedroom houses surrounding this
site 299 .
5.82
For this and the following 9 sites no alternative options were considered. These
allocations all directly relate to proposals in area-based masterplans and
Neighbourhood Development Frameworks that have undergone several rounds
of consultation.
Justification for Conditions
5.83
There is a site specific condition to replace some informal open space on-site if
the area it currently covers at Cricket Inn Crescent is needed for redevelopment.
Sustainability Issues
5.84
The site is next to an establised residential area, and close to a tramstop at
Cricket Inn Road, and high-frequency bus routes. It is within 400m of Wybourn
Neighbourhood Centre, which consists of existing community facilities, and will
provide additional services in the future following development initiatives at Manor
Oaks Road. The distances involved will allow for residents to travel to nearby
facilities without having to rely on private means of transport.
5.85
The proposed allocation would promote the housing market renewal process and
the development of the brownfield site will lead to visual improvements within the
local area and would also use existing infrastructure on site.
5.86
Archaeological potential will need to be assessed, as part of the site historically
accommodated Wybourn Hall and the South Yorkshire Archaeology Service has
indicated that site investigations will be required. Issues about noise from Cricket
Inn Road need to be assessed and addressed.
5.87
Capacity of local schools may be an issue, see paragraph 5.35
Equality Issues
5.88
299
Housing on this site will benefit people with low access to private transport (being
within 400m of a Supertram and a high-frequency bus route); and would be in a
suitable location for smaller, higher density accommodation suited to young
groups.
Masterplan page 34
- 250 -
Consultee Preferences
5.89
At the Emerging Options stage a comment supported this allocation despite there
being an element of previously designated Open Space Area, because the site is
needed to meet strategic housing requirements. The Open Space referred to at
the frontage of Cricket Inn Road has been assessed through the masterplanning
process, and is considered as having little intrinsic value. It has therefore been
incorporated into the Housing Area designation; see Chapter 4 Housing Policy
Areas paragraph 4.156 for details.
Effectiveness
Delivery, flexibility and risk
5.90
The City Council as the current landowner proposes to dispose of this land
(alongside P00211 Maltravers, see paragraph 5.104) to Great Places 300 so that it
can be redeveloped in line with the regeneration objectives for this area. A
planning and design brief has been produced to guide development on this site,
and ensure that the mix and design of accomodation is sustainable and
contributes positively to regeneration objectives as set out in the Master Plan.
5.91
Great Places intend to develop this site in 2 phases with a view to development
being complete by 2021. Funding for 48 units in phase 1 has been secured
through the HCA Affordable Homes Programme, and planning consent is in
place 301. A start on site for phase 1 is expected in June 2013 with completion in
2014. Great Places are also working to secure additional funds to deliver phase
2, with a view to accelerating development forward to complete by 2017. Should
appropriate funds not be secured for accelerated delivery, completion is expected
by 2021.
Monitoring
5.92
This will be though SHLAA and the Development Management process. The
Regeneration Team working with Great Places will have its own monitoring
mechanisms to ensure the project is successfully delivered.
P00209 Harborough Avenue/ Viking Lea
Justification
5.93
The Manor Neighbourhood Development Framework earmarks this site for new
housing due to its location within an existing residential area, next to an important
300
A Registered Social Landlord managing and maintaining the majority of social rented properties in
Wybourn
301
Planning application reference 13/00638/FUL
- 251 -
green link, and the demolition work which has already taken place on site. This
site has the opportunity to contribute to the vision for the area which includes
selective redevelopment to provide higher quality housing, including aspirational
housing.
5.94
In accordance with Core Strategy policy CS26 ’Efficient Use of Housing Land and
Accessibility’ , the site can accommodate between 76 and 127 dwellings, which
will provide housing units meeting part of the targets of policy CS22 ’Scale of
Requirement for New Housing.
5.95
The allocation would promote housing renewal and the development of the
brownfield site would lead to visual improvements within the local area and would
also utilise existing infrastructure on site.
5.96
For alternative options see paragraph 5.82.
Justification for Conditions
5.97
There are no site specific conditions attached to this allocation.
Sustainability Issues
5.98
The proposed allocation would promote housing renewal and the development of
the brownfield site would lead to visual improvements within the local area, and
utilising existing infrastructure on site. The site is in an established residential
area, and is within 400m of Manor (Lower) Neighbourhood Centre, which
provides local facilities and services including a supermarket. The site adjoins a
medium frequency bus route, and open spaces are in close proximity. A Travel
Plan submitted alongside the development will be required to reduce demand for
private transport. Capacity of local schools may be an issue, see paragraph 5.35.
Equality Issues
5.99
Housing on this site will provide some benefits to people with low access to
private transport, as the site is near to local open space, shops and services and
a medium frequency bus route.
Consultee Preferences
5.100 No comments have been received for this site allocation.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
5.101 The City Council as landowner will have a lead role in ensuring delivery of
appropriate development. The Regeneration Team has explored the potential to
- 252 -
develop the site using a Community Land Trust Development Model, but this has
not progressed any further. It is anticipated that the Council will dispose of the
site on the open market.
5.102 It is anticipated that development will be completed by 2021.
Monitoring
5.103 This will be done through the SHLAA and the Development Management
process.
P00211 Maltravers
Justification
5.104 This site sits within an established residential area and the need to retain a
residential designation is set out within the Wybourn, Manor Park and
Arbourthorne Masterplan 302. The redevelopment of the site for housing will
contribute greatly to the regeneration of Wybourn and the overall delivery of
housing renewal in the area. It is essential that this site is able to be developed
for housing in order to restore the community and support ailing local facilities.
5.105 The SHLAA anticipates that 30 houses can be provided at this site 303. Such
provision would provide houses that would help to meet the housing targets
within CS22 ’Scale of Requirement for New Housing’.
5.106 Redevelopment with this site will help deliver Housing Renewal through bringing
an empty site into use, and restoring a community here. This site has the
opportunity to contribute to the vision for the area which includes selective
redevelopment to provide higher quality housing, including aspirational housing.
The Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne Masterplan identifies a medium
demand for the remaining 2 and 3 bedroom houses surrounding this site 304.
5.107 For alternative options see paragraph 5.82.
Justification for Conditions
5.108 There are no site specific conditions for this allocation.
Sustainability Issues
5.109 Same as P00206 see paragraphs 5.84 -1.86 and 5.87 for details
302
See Chapter 1 paragraph 1.83, and document pages 73-75.
SHLAA reference S00714
304
Masterplan page 34
303
- 253 -
Equality Issues
5.110 Housing on this site will benefit people with low access to private transport (being
within 400m of a Supertram and a high-frequency bus route); and will be in a
suitable location for younger families. Due to topography there may be issues for
the elderly and/ or those with mobility problems.
Consultee Preferences
5.111 No comments were received in respect of this allocation.
Effectiveness
Delivery, flexibility and risk
5.112 The City Council as the current landowner has agreed to dispose of this land
(alongside P00206 Cricket Inn, paragraph 5.78 ) to the developer Great Places
so that it can be redeveloped in line with the regeneration objectives for this area.
A planning and design brief has been produced, to guide development on this site
and ensure that the mix and design of accomodation is sustainable, and
contributes positively to regeneration objectives as set out in the Master Plan.
5.113 Great Places intend to develop this site with a view to completion by 2021. The
site is currently being considered for affordable housing and it is anticipated that
funding will be secured through the HCA Affordable Homes Programme.
Monitoring
5.114 This will be though SHLAA and the Development Management process. The
Regeneration Team working with Great Places will have its own monitoring
mechanisms to ensure the project is successfully delivered.
P00213 Manor Community Centre
Justification
5.115 The Manor Neighbourhood Development Framework earmarks this site for new
housing, due to its location within an existing residential area, next to an
important green link, and the demolition which has already taken place on site.
This site has the opportunity to contribute to the vision for the area which includes
selective redevelopment to provide higher quality housing, including aspirational
housing.
- 254 -
5.116 In accordance with Core Strategy policy CS26 ’Efficient Use of Housing Land and
Accessibility’, the site can accommodate between 32 and 52 dwellings, which will
provide housing units meeting part of the targets of CS22 ’Scale of Requirement
for New Housing.
5.117 For alternative options see paragraph 5.82.
Justification for Conditions
5.118 There are no site-specific conditions for this site.
Sustainability Issues
5.119 See P00209 at paragraph 5.98.
Equality Issues
5.120 See P00209 at paragraph 5.99
Consultee Preferences
5.121 At the Emerging Options Stage 305 a comment was made suggesting that the site
should accommodate a replacement community centre alongside new housing.
This area has been extensively masterplanned and the need for new housing has
been prioritised on this site to meet the needs of the area.
Effectiveness
Delivery, flexibility and risk
5.122 See P00209 at paragraph 5.101
5.123 It is anticipated that development will have been completed by 2021.
Monitoring
5.124 This will be done through SHLAA and the Development Management process.
305
Comment ID 4970.038
- 255 -
P00215 Manor 8
Justification
5.125 This site sits within an established residential area and the need to enable
residential development here is set out within the Manor Neighbourhood
Development Framework 306.
5.126 The SHLAA indicates that 123 houses can be provided upon this site 307, whilst
the requirements of Core Strategy policy CS26 ’Efficient Use of Housing Land
and Accessibility’ indicate that the site can accommodate between 85 and 170
dwellings, which will assist in meeting the aims of policy CS22 ’Scale of
Requirement for New Housing .
5.127 The redevelopment of the site will contribute greatly to the regeneration of Manor
and the overall delivery of housing renewal in the area. It is essential that this site
is able to be developed for housing in order to help restore the community and
support ailing local facilities at nearby Fairleigh Neighbourhood Centre. A larger
population within the local area should provide a critical mass of consumers
within the local area to ensure the viability of stores located here.
5.128 For alternative options see paragraph 5.82.
Sustainability Issues
5.129 The allocation would promote the housing renewal process, and the adoption of
the brownfield site will lead to visual improvements within the local area. The site
is next to an establised residential area, and is close to Fairleigh Neighbourhood
centre, which includes a post office and convenience store in addition to some
community facilities. The site is also within 400m of a medium frequency bus
route. A Travel Plan will be required to reduce resident’s dependence on private
transport. Capacity of local schools may be an issue, see paragraph 5.35.
Equality Issues
5.130 See P00209 at paragraph 5.99.
Consultee Preferences
5.131 An observation was made at the Emerging Options stage 308 that the site has a
playground and there are no details of a PPG17 assessment. It is considered
that this playground if of nominal value, as assessed though the extensive
masterplanning process.
306
See Chapter 2 paragraph 1.82 and document, pages. 85-87.
SHLAA reference S00701
308
Comment ID 4970.034
307
- 256 -
Effectiveness
Delivery, flexibility and risk
5.132 The City Council as landowner has a lead role in ensuring delivery of appropriate
development. Discussion is pending with a developer who has a planning
309
application submitted for the site , subject to the developer being able to secure
appropriate funds.
5.133 It is anticipated that development will be completed by 2016; subject to the
developer being able to secure appropriate funds. If the developer is
unsuccessful the City Council will need to look at alternative delivery options, but
it is envisaged that the development will be completed within the life of the plan
period i.e. by 2026.
Monitoring
5.134 This will be done through the SHLAA and the Development Management
process.
P00222 Park Hill Flats phases 2 & 3
Justification
5.135 The City Road Neighbourhood Development Framework 310 advocates the
creation of a gateway where Park Hill joins Duke Street, which the redevelopment
of the flats will support. Work has started on Phase 1 311 of the redevelopment
and Urban Splash are committed to completing the scheme, which comprises of
a redevelopment of the Listed Building, retaining the mostly residential use.
5.136 The delivery of housing here will help meet the housing requirements of Core
Strategy policy CS22 ’Scale of Requirement for New Housing’.
5.137 The visibility and iconic status of Park Hill Flats mean that the redevelopment of
this site is an extremely important part of the regeneration of this area and
contributes to the regeneration of the City Centre as well.
5.138 The allocation will promote the housing market renewal process, and the re-use
of the existing building will lead to visual improvements within the local area and
will also use existing infrastructure on site. The site benefits from being within
309
Planning application reference 08/02822/FUL is pending full approval. Approved by Planning Board
22/11/08, awaiting completion of S106 agreement.
310
See Chapter 1 paragraph 1.79, and document page 31.
311
Planning application reference 11/02801/REM
- 257 -
walking distance of a local Neighbourhood Centre, the City Centre, and public
transport routes, offering an opportunity for residents to access required everyday
facilities in a sustainable manner.
5.139 Phase 1 of the Park Hill development is due to be completed before the
document is published and has, therefore, been excluded from the allocation
boundary.
5.140 For alternative options see paragraph 5.82.
Justification for Conditions
5.141 There is a condition to safeguard the character and setting of the Listed Park Hill
Flats and the Norfolk Road Conservation Area in keeping with concerns
expressed by English Heritage, see paragraph 5.144.
Sustainability Issues
5.142 The site is next to an established residential area, it is highly accessible as it is
close to the Railway Station and the tramstop adjacent to the station, and a high
frequency bus route also runs along City Road. The site is within 400m of Duke
Street Neighbourhood Centre and also the facilities of the City Centre. The
distances involved will allow for residents to travel to nearby facilities without
having to rely on private means of transport. It also involves the refubishment
and re-use of a Listed Building.
Equality Issues
5.143 Housing on this site will benefit people with low access to private transport as the
public transport network is highly accessible and it is on the edge of the city
centre. It would be in a suitable location for smaller accommodation suited to
young people.
Consultee Preferences
5.144 A comment from English Heritage at the Draft Plan 2010 312 stage highlights the
need for development here to safeguard the setting of the Norfolk Road
Conservation Area and to preserve the key elements of Park Hill, a Grade II*
listed building. A specific condition has been included, see paragraph 5.141, and
development here will also be subject to the requirements of policy G7
‘Development and Heritage Assets’ 313 of the City Policies and Sites Document,
including protecting the setting of these heritage assets. In the case of this site,
new buildings alongside the Park Hill complex will need to retain the prominence
of the main building, and be in scale with the setting of the neighbouring
312
313
Comment ID dcps775
City Policies and Sites, page 89
- 258 -
Conservation Area. The recladding of Park Hill is already agreed in principle,
following the permission granted for Phase 1 of the development. Additional
development will need to tie in with the existing new cladding, and to respect the
details of the original building.
5.145 At the Draft Plan (2010) 314 stage, the Homes and Communities Agency supported
the allocation here. They did raise the issue of potentially allowing the allocation
to include ancillary uses. Housing allocations already allow for up to 20%
ancillary uses, whilst the majority of non-housing uses in Park Hill as a whole will
not be part of this allocation.
Effectiveness
Delivery
5.146 The City Council are working with Urban Splash on the redevelopment. Work on
Phase 1 has already begun. Like any other development, Urban Splash will need
to address development viability issues that include a range of factors including:
• costs
• values and phasing
• mix and type
• quality standards
• site abnormals
• processes (i.e. formal closures/ diversions etc).
5.147 Issues that are likely to affect the development are:
• housing market needs,
• demand
• sales values
• phasing so that the localised market is not saturated
5.148 The current market may slow progress, but Urban Splash are committed to the
development. It is anticipated that business plans for phase 2 and beyond will be
agreed by 2015. Development of these phases is expected to be complete by
2026.
5.149 The Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) is providing some funding for the
scheme.
5.150 The size of the site, with several residential units formed, will necessitate a travel
plan to reduce the level of car dependant journeys. A Travel Plan has been
produced as part of an outline planning application for the site 315. This includes
314
315
Comment IDdcps301
Planning application reference 06/00848/OUT
- 259 -
Phase 1, but relates to the entire estate and requires a travel plan effectively for
each phase.
5.151 The Sheffield Energy and Water Infrastructure Study, see paragraph 3.14, has
highlighted the presence of District Heating at the site.
Flexibility and Risk
5.152 This is a significant project that is vulnerable to the current economic climate, the
main risk will relate to the availability of finance to sustain all the phases. Linked
to this will be the issues of sales on earlier phases potentially affecting progress
on subsequent phases.
Monitoring
5.153 This will be done through SHLAA and the Development Management process.
Urban Splash and the City Council also have their own monitoring mechanisms to
monitor progress on this major regeneration project.
P00226 Seaton Crescent
Justification
5.154 This site sits within an established residential area and the need to retain a
residential designation is set out within the Wybourn, Manor Park and
Arbourthorne Masterplan 316 . The redevelopment of the site will contribute greatly
to the regeneration of Wybourn and the overall delivery of focusing market
renewal in the area. It is essential that this site is developed for housing in order
to help restore the community and support ailing local facilities at Manor Park.
5.155 Core Strategy policy CS26 ’Efficient Use of Housing Land and Accessibility’
would allow up to 40 dwellings here, and the provision of new homes here would
help meet the requirements of policy CS22’Scale of Requirement for New
Housing’ .
5.156 The Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne masterplan identified a medium
demand for the remaining 2 and 3 bedroom houses surrounding this site 317 . The
Housing Market Assessment (HMA) identifies that there are very few detached
homes in the South HMR area, and the number of larger, 3+ bedroom homes is
also low. This allocation should help to provide new housing that will increase the
numbers of larger houses within the area.
316
317
See Chapter 1 paragraph 1.83, and document pages. 76-78.
Masterplan page 34
- 260 -
5.157 This site has the opportunity to contribute to the vision for the area which includes
selective redevelopment to provide higher quality housing, including aspirational
housing.
5.158 For alternative options see paragraph 5.82.
Sustainability Issues
5.159 The allocation will promote the housing renewal process and the development of
the brownfield site will lead to visual improvements within the local area. The site
is next to an establised residential area, and is close to a high frequency bus
route. The site is within 400m of Wybourn Neighbourhood Centre, which
provides local facilities and services. The distances involved will allow residents
to travel to nearby facilities without having to rely on private means of transport.
Capacity of local schools may be an issue, see paragraph 5.35.
Equality Issues
5.160 Housing on this site will provide some benefits to people with low access to
private transport, as the site is near to local open space, shops and services and
a high frequency bus route.
Consultee Preferences
5.161 A comment was received at the Emerging Options stage 318 that the site has
ancillary open space and this part of the site is greenfield. However, the
Council’s view is that it is brownfield as it previously accommodated a maisonette
complex with associated amenity space.
Effectiveness
Delivery
5.162 Development is anticipated by the Regeneration Team to be complete by 2016.
Planning approval has been acquired April 2012, and the site is ready to be
delivered by a registered housing provider as soon as appropriate funds become
available.
Flexibility and Risk
5.163 This site is dependent upon the availability of funds.
318
Comment ID 4970.036
- 261 -
Monitoring
5.164 This will be done through the SHLAA and the Development Management
process.
P00228 Skye Edge Avenue
Justification
5.165 This site sits within an established residential area and the need for residential
use is set out within the Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne Masterplan 319.
The redevelopment of the site will contribute greatly to the regeneration of
Wybourn and the overall delivery of housing renewal in the area. It is essential
that this site can be developed for housing in order to help restore the community
and support ailing local facilities.
5.166 In accordance with Core Strategy policy CS26 ’Efficient Use of Housing Land and
Accessibility’, the site can accommodate between 92 and 138 dwellings, and
development here will help meet the requirements of policy CS22 ’Scale of
Requirement for New Housing’, to provide more housing in Sheffield.
5.167 For alternative options see paragraph 5.82
Sustainability Issues
5.168 The allocation will promote housing renewal, and the redevelopment of the
brownfield site will lead to visual improvements within the local area. The site is
next to an establised residential area, and is close to a medium frequency bus
route. The site is within 400m of Wybourn Neighbourhood Centre. The distances
involved will allow for residents to travel to nearby facilities without having to rely
on private means of transport.
Equality Issues
5.169 Housing on this site will provide some benefits to people with low access to
private transport, as the site is near to local open space, shops and services and
a medium frequency bus route.
Consultee Preferences
5.170 A comment at the Emerging Options stage 320 was that part of the site has open
space, and that there was no evidence of an Open Space Assessment.
However, it was acknowledged that greenfield sites are needed to meet the
319
320
See Chapter 1 paragraph 1.83 and document, pages.67-69.
Comment ID 4970.040
- 262 -
strategic housing requirements. The open space issues were addressed as part
of that process The majority of this site is within an existing Housing Area under
the UDP, and as part of extensive master planning of the area a small proportion
of the open space area (of nominal value) is included in the development site, to
improve frontage and natural surveillance onto the Open Space Area to make it
more user-friendly.
Effectiveness
Delivery, flexibility and risk
5.171 The site was entered in 2007 for the Europan Young Architects competition and
Prewit Bizley Architects were announced as winners in 2008 for their design, this
is therefore a high profile site 321. The highly visible location of the site and early
interest in it increases the likelihood of it being developed in the future, although
market conditions will have an impact on timing.
5.172 A brief will need to be produced to guide development on this site and ensure that
the mix and design of accomodation is sustainable and contributes to
regeneration objectives. The masterplan provides the principles on which to base
this.
5.173 It is anticipated that this site will be developed by 2021.
Monitoring
5.174 This will be done through the SHLAA and the Development Management
process.
P00230 St Johns School Manor Oaks Road
Justification
5.175 The Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne masterplan 322 identified a medium
demand for the remaining 2 and 3 bedroom houses surrounding this site. The
Housing Market Assessment (HMA) identifies that there are very few detached
homes in the South HMR area, and the number of larger, 3+ bedroom homes is
also low.
5.176 In accordance with Core Strategy policy CS26 ’Efficient Use of Housing Land and
Accessibility’, the site can accommodate between 28 and 42 dwellings. This will
321
322
See Europan. Europan-Europe Homepage
See Chapter 1 paragraph 1.83 and document, page 34.
- 263 -
assist in meeting the requirements of Core Strategy policy CS22 ’Scale of
Requirement for New Housing’.
5.177 Redevelopment with this site will help deliver housing renewal, restore a
community and support local facilities. This site has the opportunity to contribute
to the vision for the area which includes selective redevelopment to provide
higher quality housing, including aspirational housing.
5.178 The site is derelict, but cleared of former school buildings, with some remaining
hardstandings. As such, redevelopment of land on this site would improve the
appearance of the site.
5.179 The proposed allocation will promote housing renewal and also use existing
infrastructure on site.
5.180 For alternative options see paragraph 5.82.
Justification for Conditions
5.181 There are no conditions proposed for this allocation.
Sustainability Issues
5.182 The site is next to an establised residential area, and is in close proximity to a
high frequency bus route. The site is within 400m of Wybourn Neighbourhood
Centre, which provides numerous facilities and services. The distances involved
will allow for residents to travel to nearby facilities without having to rely on
private means of transport. Capacity of local schools may be an issue, see
paragraph 5.35.
Equality Issues
5.183 Housing on this site will provide some benefits to people with low access to
private transport, as the site is near to local open space, shops and services and
a medium frequency bus route. It would also be in a suitable location for smaller
accommodation suited to young groups.
Consultee Preferences
5.184 No comments have been received in respect of this allocation.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
5.185 The school and Diocese of Sheffield as the current landowner will market and
dispose of the site to a developer. It is anticipated that development will have
- 264 -
occurred on this site by 2021 as the Diocese have expressed an intention to
dipose of the site as soon as they can. This may be dependant on current market
conditions.
Monitoring
5.186 This will be done through SHLAA and the Development Management process.
Arbourthorne Ward
Sheffield Housing Company sites
Norfolk Park and Arbourthorne
•
•
•
•
•
•
P00330
P00333
P00335
P00336
P00337
P00424
Daresbury Drive
Kenninghall Drive
Park Grange Drive
Park Spring Drive A
Park Spring Drive B
Former Bluestones Primary School
Justification and Alternative Options
Alternative Options
5.187 No alternative options have been considered for these sites as all the allocations,
apart from the former Bluestones School, directly relate to proposals in areabased masterplans and Neighbourhood Development Frameworks that have
undergone several rounds of consultation and are approved as material
considerations by the City Council. Chapter 1 outlines that through these
processes it has been well established that new housing is a key priority for the
regeneration of the Norfolk Park and Arbourthorne areas, see from paragraph
1.75. All of the sites have been cleared as part of past regeneration efforts or
school re-organisation, and have been held specifically for new housing of
different types and tenures to help tackle current market weaknesses throughout
the area. This directly links with Core Strategy policies CS23 ‘Locations for New
Housing’ and CS24 ‘Maximising the Use of Previously Developed Land for New
Housing’.
Justification for Conditions
5.188 There are some site specific conditions for some of the proposed allocations as
follows:
- 265 -
P00330 Daresbury Drive
Condition
Reason for condition
Space next to East Bank Road to be
retained for a Green Link connecting
greenspaces to the north and south of
the site.
The Green Link is required to allow
movement of wildlife between Local
Nature Sites at Black Bank and
Buck Wood.
Developer Implications
These conditions will have an impact on design and costs.
Delivery
As this is a Sheffield Housing Company site, the Council will prepare a
Planning and Design Brief setting out the site-specific requirements. This will
be used by the Sheffield Housing Company to guide design development
from the outset, and will be used as key tool by the Council through the
formal Development Management pre-application and application processes.
P00333 Kenninghall Drive
Condition(s)
Reason for condition(s)
(1) Some informal open space to be
laid out (including some children’s
play provision) and supported by a
funded maintenance plan.
Provision of the informal open space
would meet the needs of this site
and Site P00330 Daresbury Drive in
accordance with policy D2 ‘Open
Space in Large New Housing
Developments’ 323.
(2) A buffer approximately 6 metres
wide between new development and
the Black Bank Local Nature Site
To prevent adverse impact on the
eastern edge of the LNS.
(3) Development to respect any trees
that need to be retained.
To acknowledge the landscape and
conservation value of existing trees.
Developer Implications
Condition (1) will have a financial implication but the cost will not be onerous
given the likely market value of this site.
323
City Policies and Sites, page 45
- 266 -
P00333 Kenninghall Drive
Delivery
All of the Sheffield Housing Company sites will have the same delivery
mechanism for its conditions; see P00330 above for details.
P00335 Park Grange Drive
Condition(s)
Reason for condition(s)
(1) Safeguarding of the setting of
Norfolk Park.
The neighbouring Norfolk Park is a
Grade II Historic Park and new
development must be sensitive to
this heritage asset.
(2) Development to respect trees that
need to be retained.
To acknowledge the landscape and
conservation value of existing trees.
(3) A buffer should be retained
between development and the Jervis
Lumb Local Nature Site.
To prevent adverse impact on the
edge of the LNS.
Developer Implications
The cost implications of these conditions will not be onerous and should be
regarded as normal given the setting of this site.
Delivery
All of the Sheffield Housing Company sites will have the same delivery
mechanism for its conditions; see P00330 above for details.
P00336 Park Spring Drive A
Condition(s)
Reason for condition(s)
(1) Development to incorporate a new
road link from East Bank Road to
Park Spring Drive to better connect
Norfolk Park to adjoining
neighbourhoods.
The link provides an alternative
means of access for this large
development in the event of any
highway closures preventing use of
the remaining network serving this
site. It will also help to deter crime by
increasing natural surveillance and
- 267 -
P00336 Park Spring Drive A
ease of policing.
(2) Retain mature woodland and the
green link between Black Bank and
landscaped areas within the Queens
Tower complex and beyond, with the
exception of trees in the path of the
new access road.
To acknowledge the landscape and
conservation value of existing trees
within this green link.
(3) Parking to be provided for existing
residents on Park Spring Drive.
To mitigate loss of on-street parking
due to protection of drives of new
houses.
(4) Safeguarding of the setting of the
Queen’s Tower and neighbouring
buildings.
The site surrounds a number of
Listed Buildings around Queen’s
Tower and development must be
sensitive to these heritage assets.
Developer Implications
The costs relating to these conditions have been absorbed in the scheme that
is currently being built on this site 324.
Delivery
Work commenced on the southern half of this site to build 86 houses in
December 2012 and the development should be completed by 2016. The
remainder is programmed in the Sheffield Housing Company’s 2nd Phase.
P00337 Park Spring Drive B
Condition
Reason for condition
Site layout to retain some areas of
mature woodland.
To acknowledge the landscape and
conservation value of existing trees.
Developer Implications
As for Site P00336 above.
Delivery
Planning consent has been given for 33 houses and completion should take
place in 2014333.
324
Planning application reference 12/00205/FUL
- 268 -
P00424 Former Bluestones Primary School
Condition(s)
Reason for condition(s)
(1) Safeguarding of the setting of
Norfolk Park.
As for site P00335.
(2) A buffer to be provided between
development and the Jervis Lumb
Local Nature Site.
Developer Implications
The cost implications of these conditions will not be onerous and should be
regarded as normal given the setting of this site.
Delivery
Site will be included in Phase 3 of SHC’s programme and delivery will be as
per details for Site P00330 above.
Sustainability Issues
5.189 Overall, all of the sites have a positive performance for residential development.
They are brownfield sites, so there will be established infrastructure and utilities
that can be used. They will all help to improve housing choice in their
neighbourhoods and some will assist in providing links to the wider open space
network in the area. The sites are in close proximity to a range of community
assets that include parks, woodland and new housing will benefit from the new
Neighbourhood Centre planned for Norfolk Park. The public transport network is
very accessible with some sites being very close to tram stops and bus routes
with good frequency services. Capacity of local schools may be an issue, see
paragraph 5.35 .
Equality Issues
5.190 Housing on these sites will benefit people with low access to private transport as
public transport is accessible with a range of high and medium frequency bus
routes and the Supertram. These sites would be beneficial for residents in various
groups including the young and elderly as they will be able to access local
amenities and a range of house types/tenures to suit their needs. See paragraph
5.38 for the beneficial impact of Sheffield Housing Company’s Equalities,
Inclusion and Regeneration Strategy in relation to these sites.
- 269 -
5.191 Wheelchair accessible housing will need to use the flatter parts of sites P00330
Daresbury Drive, P00333 Kenninghall Drive and P00336 Park Spring Drive A to
mitigate problems caused for users by the topography in those locations.
Consultee Preferences
5.192 The following comments have been made via consultation at the various stages
of drafting the emerging site allocations and Proposals Map.
Site
Comment
Response
At the Preferred Options
and Consultation Draft
stages English Heritage
sought to add an extra
P00424 Former
Bluestones School condition that proposals on
these sites should
safeguard the character of
the setting for Norfolk Park
which is a Grade II Historic
Park and Garden 325.
P00335 Park
Grange Drive and
P00366 Park
Spring Drive A
325
326
At the same stages English
Heritage sought to add an
extra condition that
proposals on this site
should safeguard the
heritage assets of a group
of listed buildings around
Queen’s Tower 326.
Comment ID 2170
Comment ID 2171
- 270 -
This matter will be
addressed through the
Development Management
process and via relevant
policies such as G7
‘Development and Heritage
Assets'. An extra bespoke
condition has also been
included in the site
allocation to reinforce this
factor. See paragraph
5.188.
.
This has been addressed
for the southern half of the
site through the planning
decision to grant permission
for 88 houses. The same
process will be observed for
the remainder of the site.
An extra bespoke condition
has also been included in
the site allocation to
reinforce this factor. See
paragraph 5.188
Effectiveness
Delivery
5.193 See earlier paragraphs from 5.40 for how the Sheffield Housing Company intends
to deliver these sites. Site specific details on programming alongside potential
constraints and infrastructure needs are presented below:
Site
Programme for delivery
Site-specific issues
P00330 Daresbury Drive Currently programmed for Site topography will
construction 2016 with
need to be addressed.
completion by 2017.
P00333 Kenninghall
Drive
Currently programmed for Site topography will also
construction 2017 with
need to be addressed.
completion by 2020.
P00335 Park Grange
Drive
Currently programmed for
construction 2015 with
completion by 2016.
P00336 Park Spring
Drive A and
Site B and the southern
half of Site A is already
under construction for
119 houses and should
be complete by 2014.
The northern part of Site
A will start in late 2014
and be complete by
2015.
P00337 Park Spring
Drive B
P00424 Former
Bluestones Primary
School
Probably Phase 3 in
Sheffield Housing
Company’s programme
starting after 2020 but
completed by 2026.
Flexibility/ Risk and Monitoring
5.194 See earlier paragraphs 5.45 and 5.51 for these aspects.
- 271 -
Site topography needs
to be addressed.
Arbourthorne Ward
Non Sheffield Housing Company Sites
Upper Arbourthorne Sites
•
•
•
P00433 Errington Crescent/Errington Road
P00434 Berners Road/Berners Place
P00435 Algar Place/Algar Road
Justification and Options
Alternative Options
5.195 No alternative options have been considered for these sites as the allocations
directly relate to the Wybourn, Manor Park and Arbourthorne Neighbourhood
Development Framework that has undergone several rounds of consultation and
is approved as a material consideration by the City Council. Chapter 1 outlines
that that through the above it has been well established that replacement housing
is a key priority for the regeneration of the Upper Arbourthorne area, see from
paragraph 1.75.
5.196 Clearance has taken place on Site P00433 Errington Crescent/Errington Road
and funding has been secured to continue the programme on Sites P00434
Berners Road and P00435 Algar Place 327. The land has been held specifically
to be redeveloped for new housing of different types/tenures that will contribute
towards tackling current market weaknesses throughout the area. This directly
links with Core Strategy policies CS23 ‘Locations for New Housing’ and CS24
‘Maximising the Use of Previously Developed Land for New Housing’.
Justification for Conditions
5.197 There are some site specific conditions for 2 of the proposed allocations as
follows:
Site P00433 Errington Crescent/Errington Road
Condition
Reason for condition
Some older persons’ housing to be
included.
The older persons’ housing is needed in
the first development phase to give an
opportunity for existing residents affected
by clearance to remain in the locality.
Developer Implications
327
Cabinet Meeting 8/5/13 at Council-meetings/cabinet/agendas-2013/agenda-8th-may-2013 see item 10
- 272 -
Site P00433 Errington Crescent/Errington Road
A development fulfilling this requirement started on site at the beginning of this
year.
Delivery
The Local Planning Authority has prepared a market brief and selected a
development Partner (Sanctuary Housing) to provide the older persons’ housing
scheme. Planning permission for 56 units on the East Bank Road frontage of
this site has been granted subject to a legal agreement 328. A development
partner will be selected to develop the remainder of the site.
Site P00434 Berners Road/Berners Place
Condition
Reason for condition
Layout to provide a green link
between green spaces to the north
and south of this site.
The Green Link is required to facilitate
movement of wildlife across the site, see
policy G2 ‘The Green Network’ 329.
Developer Implications
This condition has only a minor impact on design and costs given that the link
has only to serve an ecological function.
Delivery
The Council will prepare a Planning and Design Brief setting out site specific
requirements. This will be used by a development partner to guide design
development from the outset, and will be used as a key tool by the Council
through the formal Development Management pre-application and application
processes.
Sustainability Issues
5.198 Overall, all 3 sites have a positive performance for residential development. They
are brownfield sites, so there will be established infrastructure and utilities that
can be used. They will all help to improve housing choice in Upper Arbourthorne
and the Berners Road/Berners Place site (P00434) will assist in providing links to
the wider open space network in the area. New residential development will
328
329
Planning application reference 12/01077/FUL
City Policies and Sites, page 75
- 273 -
remedy a poor existing urban layout leading to a safer neighbourhood. The sites
are close to a range of community assets that include parks, playing fields,
woodland and local shopping and medical facilities within walking distance. The
public transport network is very accessible with some sites being close to tram
stops as well as bus routes with good frequency services. Capacity of local
schools may be an issue, see paragraph 5.35.
Equality Issues
5.199 Housing on these sites will benefit people with low access to private transport as
public transport is accessible with a range of high and medium frequency bus
routes and the Supertram. These sites would be beneficial for residents in various
groups including the young and elderly, as they will be able to access local
amenities and a range of house types/tenures to suit their needs. Older persons’
housing on the Errington Crescent/Errington Road site will particularly meet a
need for supported accommodation close to medical and shopping facilities.
5.200 Consultee Preferences
5.201 No comments were expressed on these sites at any time during the consultation
process.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
5.202 The City Council has acquired all interests on the cleared site at Errington
Road/Errington Crescent using HMR funding. Part of the site has been disposed
of to a housing association to build older persons’ housing and there is developer
interest in building out the remainder of this site. The other 2 sites include some
former Council houses, and the City Council will be responsible for re-acquiring
those either by agreement or compulsorily if necessary using funding as
mentioned below. Now that funding is available, the option of retaining and
improving Council stock on these sites can be discounted as it would not provide
a comprehensive solution for the Upper Arbourthorne estate. Privately owned
properties are ‘pepper potted’ throughout the estate and because they would
receive no investment they would have a detrimental effect on the overall
appearance of the neighbourhood. Retaining existing stock on these sites would
fail to address their poor urban layout and miss an opportunity to diversify the
housing offer for this area.
5.203 Site specific details on programming alongside potential constraints and
infrastructure needs are presented below:
- 274 -
Site
Programme for delivery
Site-specific issues
P00433
Errington
Crescent/Errington
Road
Work started on the older
persons’ housing element
early 2013 and the
scheme should be
completed by 2014. The
remainder of the site is
estimated for completion
by 2021.
P00434
Burners
Road/Berners Place
The Council plans to
acquire this site through
using the Local Growth
Fund and Council
resources. Completion by
developer(s) estimated to
be by 2021.
The Council will need to
declare clearance areas and
rehouse/compensate
existing tenants and owners
occupying this site.
.
P00435
Algar Place/Algar
Road
As for Site P00434.
As for Site P00434.
Monitoring
5.204 This will be monitored through SHLAA and the Development Management
process.
P00338 SR Gents factory, East Bank Road, Lowfield
Justification and Options
Alternative Options
5.205 The building cannot be re-used as an industrial or other business unit in its
current fire-damaged state. It would not be reasonable to redevelop the property
for those purposes since the site is detached from the Sheaf Valley Business and
Industrial Corridor and there is no strategic need to promote offices here in line
with the aims of policy CS3 ‘Locations for Office Development’. The site adjoins
houses and lies at the edge of a residential area having good access to local
amenities and regular public transport services. It therefore meets the
requirements of policy C1 ‘Access to Local Services and Community Facilities in
New Residential Developments’ for residents to maximise their use of sustainable
modes of transport. Its development for housing helps to implement Core
Strategy policy CS25 ‘Priorities for Releasing Land for New Housing’, by helping
- 275 -
to strengthen the market in part of a Housing Renewal Area. In view of the need
to identify a sufficient housing supply, and the evident suitability of this location
for housing, no alternative options were considered for this site.
Justification for Conditions
5.206 The sole condition requires that the layout should prevent noise impact from an
emergency generator in the business to the north of the site. This is necessary
because the occasional testing of the emergency generator would otherwise
cause disturbance to residents.
Sustainability Issues
5.207 Overall the site has a positive performance for residential use. This ‘brownfield’
site will benefit from established infrastructure and utilities that can be used and it
would help to improve housing choice in Lowfield. The current building is nonconforming in a residential area and its replacement by housing would improve
the local environment. It is close to a range of community assets that include
parks, woodlands and local shops. The public transport network is also
accessible with good frequency bus services available. Capacity of local schools
may be an issue, see paragraph 5.35.
Equality Issues
5.208 Housing on this site would benefit people with low access to private transport
because of the good accessibility to regular bus routes serving the area. It could
be useful for a range of people including the young and elderly as they will have
access to local amenities and a range of house types/ tenures to suit their needs.
Consultee Preferences
5.209 Yorkshire Water observed at Preferred Options stage that new development
would need to consider alternatives for disposal of surface water because of
limited capacity in public sewers. It was agreed that this would be borne in mind
at the application stage 330.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
5.210 The existing factory will need to be demolished and it may be necessary to divert
a culvert crossing the site but these issues can be addressed. A previous
application that sought to develop flats on this site did not proceed owing to a
legal agreement, requiring a possible financial contribution towards affordable
330
Comment ID 518
- 276 -
housing, remaining unsigned 331. The site is however viable for housing and
estimated for completion by 2021.
Monitoring
5.211 This will be done through the SHLAA and the Development Management
process.
Richmond and Darnall Ward
5.212 There are two housing sites, which are located in designated Housing Areas.
See Chapter 4 Housing Areas from paragraph 4.149 which detail how the policy
area is consistent with National Policy and the Core Strategy.
P00162 Former Handsworth First School, St Joseph’s Road
Justification and Options
Alternative Options
5.213 The site is vacant and unused and is situated in a well established residential
area; it is a suitable location for high density housing and is entirely in line with
the provisions of Core Strategy policy CS23 ‘Locations for New Housing’.
5.214 Given the need for housing sites and the suitability of this location for housing no
other options were considered.
Justification for Choice of Option
5.215 The site is within 200 metres of a bus stop on Handsworth Road for high
frequency bus route 52.
5.216 The site has easy access to the B6200 Handsworth Road with onward easy
access to the A57 Parkway. The site is located close to the Handsworth
Neighbourhood Centre with a range of shops and services including banks to
serve residents at the site. A superstore is located close by. This is fully
consistent with the provisions of policy C1 ‘Access to Local Services and
Community Facilities in New Residential Developments’.
Justification for Conditions
5.217 No conditions are attached to this allocation.
331
06/02631/FUL (application disposed of 22/11/12)
- 277 -
Sustainability Issues
5.218 The sustainability and equality appraisals showed that the site is sustainable for
residential use, being well located with good access by public transport, and
within walking distance of local facilities. Development will make efficient use of a
previously developed site, and provide an opportunity to improve the built
environment.
Equality Issues
5.219 Housing on this site will provide some benefits to people with low access to
private transport, as the site is near to local open space, shops and services and
a high frequency bus route.
Consultee Preferences
5.220 No relevant representations have been made in respect of this site.
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
5.221 This site will be brought forward for development or promoted by a private
developer. The site has had planning consent which has lapsed 332 , but the
principle of residential use here is established and the site is within a well
established popular and stable residential area. Delivery here is likely to be
dependent on improvement of the current market conditions but likely to be in the
medium term.
Monitoring
5.222 This will be done through the SHLAA and the Development Management
process.
P00522 Former Ravenscroft OPH, Smelterwood Road
Justification and Options
Alternative Options
5.223 The site is vacant and unused and is situated in a well established residential
area; it is a suitable location for high density housing and is entirely in line with
the provisions of CS23 ‘Locations for New Housing’. Given the need for housing
land and the site’s suitability, no alternative options were considered here.
332
Planning applications 03/01034/RG3 approved 3/6/03 and 05/00315/REM approved 17/10/06
- 278 -
Justification for Choice of Option
5.224 The site is identified in the Sheffield Housing Land Availability Study as suitable
for housing that could be completed after 2017/18 333; this would support the
provisions of CS23.
5.225 The site has bus stops on Smelterwood Road at the edge of this site for high
frequency bus route 25 towards the City Centre. It has access to the B6065
Richmond Road with onward access to the B6200 Handsworth Road and then
A57 Parkway, or eastwards towards the A6135 Mansfield Road for the outer ring
road.
5.226 The site is located close to the Stradbroke Drive Neighbourhood Centre with a
small range of local shops and services. This is fully consistent with the
provisions of policy C1 ‘Access to Local Services and Community Facilities in
New Residential Developments’.
Justification for Conditions
5.227 There are no conditions on development identified at this site.
Sustainability Issues
5.228 The sustainability and equality appraisals showed that the site is sustainable for
residential use, being well located with good access by public transport, and
within walking distance of local facilities. Development will make efficient use of a
previously developed site, and provide an opportunity to improve the built
environment.
Equality Issues
5.229 Housing on this site will provide some benefits to people with low access to
private transport, as the site is near to local shops and services and a high
frequency bus route
Consultee Preferences
5.230 No representations have been made in respect of this site
333
Site reference S01748
- 279 -
Effectiveness
Delivery, Flexibility and Risk
5.231 The site will be brought forward for development or promoted by the City Council.
There are no proposals currently for this site and delivery here is likely to be
dependent on improvement of the current market conditions, but it is likely to be
in the medium term.
Monitoring
5.232 This will be done through the SHLAA and the Development Management
process.
Conclusions on Soundness of Housing Allocations
5.233 The allocations of sites for housing are considered sound for the following
reasons.
5.234 They are positively prepared:
•
Such site allocations are a central part of maintaining a positive vision for
the City.
•
They provide clarity for decision makers on what should be permitted on
specific sites in line with plan-making requirements set out in national
policy (paragraph 154).
5.235 They are justified:
•
They have been informed by consultative neighbourhood masterplanning
that proposes housing use of these sites (paragraph 1.75).
•
They are all in sustainable locations within established residential
neighbourhoods that have good access to local amenities and regular
public transport services.
•
There are no compelling reasons to use these sites for non-residential
purposes.
•
They help implement the Core Strategy spatial strategy in respect of the
South East Urban Area because they promote objectives for transforming
housing markets, successful neighbourhoods, reducing the need to travel,
supporting sustainable transport and improving the look and performance
of urban areas (Core Strategy paragraphs 4.19 and 4.20).
- 280 -
•
They help implement strategic policies CS23 ‘Locations for New Housing’,
CS24 ‘Maximising the Use of Previously Developed Land for New
Housing’, and CS25 ‘Priorities for releasing Land for New Housing’, all
policies which deal with land recycling and the location and phased
release of housing sites.
5.236 They will be effective:
•
They are free from major constraints and the stated delivery mechanisms
and/or market interest should ensure that they are developed during the
plan period (see for example paragraph 5.40).
•
They will provide strong support for any necessary compulsory purchase to
assemble sites for new housing.
5.237 They are consistent with national policy:
•
They are consistent with key principles (paragraphs 7 and 17) of meeting
housing needs, focussing development in sustainable locations and
recycling urban land with lesser environmental value.
•
They specifically implement the policy to identify the necessary supply of
deliverable and developable housing sites for the plan period (paragraph
47).
•
They also encourage some housing re-use of non-residential sites that are
no longer required for business purposes (paragraph 51).
- 281 -
Sites no longer included
5.238 A number of sites were proposed for allocation at previous consultation stages
that are now withdrawn. The table below sets out why they are no longer
included.
Preferred Options (2007)
Site number
Allocation
Reason
735 St. Aidens
Housing
Site developed
802 Guildford Avenue
Housing
Site developed
717 Seaton Place
Housing
Site developed
809 Beldon A Norfolk Park
Housing
Site developed
726 Pipworth School
Housing
Site not available
Draft Stage (2010)
Site number
Allocation
Reason
P00222 Park Hill (phase1)
Housing
Under construction
P00362 Crossland Drive
Housing
Site developed
- 282 -