Issue - meetings

6.1

The Committee received a report of the Head of Planning (Michael Johnson) setting out the overall spatial options for meeting future development needs in Sheffield, in the period to 2039.

6.2

Also in attendance for this item was Simon Vincent (Local Plan Service Manager), who introduced the report, highlighting a number of key areas

6.3

The report contained information on the Local Plan process, a summary of comments following consultation on the Sheffield Plan issues and options, housing need and land supply, employment land needs and land supply, alterations to the Green Belt boundary and spatial options.  The report also set out five spatial options for accommodating future development, based on the identification of land supply.

6.4

The report indicated that it was the intention for full Council to approve a draft Plan in September 2022, before further public consultation took place in October/November 2022.  The approved Plan would then be submitted to the Government for public examination by April 2023.

6.5

Members of the Committee raised questions, and the following responses were provided:-

·        If the preferred option chosen did not achieve the number of homes as prescribed by the Government, the Council would need to hold further discussions with the Government. The Council had passed a motion at its meeting on 8th September 2021, which had highlighted a number of the concerns raised as part of the workshops held to discuss the Local Plan, particularly regarding the uplift of 35% required by the Government. A letter setting out the concerns raised by Sheffield residents had been sent to the Government, and the Government had sent a very detailed response which, amongst other things, indicated that housing need figure (including the 35% uplift) was just the starting point for setting the housing requirement in the Local Plan. The Government accepted that not all areas would be able to meet their full housing need. The Council would be able to take account of its land supply and constraints, including Green Belt, prior to making a decision on the city’s housing requirement.

·        Weighing up all the options, particularly taking into account the need to provide a better supply of employment land, deliver more affordable homes and protect the environment where possible, officers believed that Option 4 offered the best way forward for the city. This would not result in large areas of the Green Belt being released. The Council would have to go through the site selection process to look at which sites would best meet the city’s needs.  Site specific exceptional circumstances would still be needed to justify taking land out of the Green Belt. There were significant risks/impacts with some of the other options. Current evidence showed that the Council could provide a housing requirement figure which supported the city's economic growth aspirations, and there would be no harm caused in setting a figure lower than that prescribed by the Government.

·        With Option 4, officers did not anticipate the wholesale release of Green Belt land. It was more likely  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6