|
5.1
|
The Executive Director, City Futures
submitted a report and associated appendices that were intended to
be considered through the committee process and finally to full
Council to seek approval to consult on Sheffield’s
Publication Draft Local Plan (‘The Sheffield Plan’). It
was noted that the recommendations in the report were agreed by the
Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee on 3rd
November 2022.
The report and the appendices, which
was considered by the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy
Committee, summarises the benefits of the Local Plan and outlines
the process that should enable the Plan to be adopted by the end of
2024. The public consultation strategy is also found in the
appendix. Councillor Otten raised concerns in respect of the
proposals in respect of wood burning stoves and restrictions around
hot food takeaways and it was noted that these issues would be
considered at the cross party working
group considering the Local Plan.
|
|
5.2
|
RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy
Committee:-
(a) Endorses the
Publication Draft Sheffield Plan for the purposes of public
consultation;
(b) Endorses the
consultation programme for seeking the public’s view on the
Publication Draft Sheffield Plan;
(c) Endorses the
list of ‘submission documents’ as defined in paragraph
4.3.3 of the Appendix and listed in paragraph 4.3.4 of the Appendix
that will form part of the public consultation;
(d) Refers this
report to full Council to seek their approval of the Publication
Draft Plan, the consultation programme and the list of
‘submission documents’;
(e) Requests
that any ‘schedule of suggested amendments’ (referred
to at paragraph 1.11.2 of the Appendix)
compiled after the consultation of the Publication Draft Sheffield
Plan be approved by the Strategy and Resources Committee and full
Council prior to submitting the relevant documents to the
Government;
(f) Recommends
that, in due course, full Council delegates authority to the Chief
Planning Officer, in consultation with the Chair, Deputy chair and
Spokesperson of the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy
Committee, to approve any non-material amendments to the
Publication Draft Sheffield Plan and consultation programme prior
to public consultation and any adjustments to the list of
submission documents set out in paragraph 4.3.4;
and
(g) Endorses the
minor amendments set out in paragraph 1.2 of the report which were
endorsed by the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy
Committee on 3 November 2022.
|
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
Reasons for Decision
|
|
|
|
|
5.3.1
|
Once adopted,
the new Sheffield Plan will make a major contribution to the future
development of the city and will guide development over the next
15-20 years. The content of the Draft Plan and the public
consultation programme take account of the risks and alternative
options set out in section 5 above.
|
|
|
|
|
5.3.2
|
The documents
that are the subject of this report (Part 1: Strategy, Sub Area
Policies and Site Allocations, Part 2: Development Management
Policies, Annex A: Site Allocation Schedule, Annex B: Parking
Guidelines, Policies Map and Glossary) comprise the draft
development plan documents for Sheffield. It is published under
Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning)
(England) Regulations 2012 (as amended). The submission documents
will include such documents as fall within the definition at
Regulation 17 (as quoted in paragraph 4.3.3) and which are listed
at paragraph 4.3.4.
|
|
|
|
|
5.3.3
|
The documents
represent the Council’s firm proposals for the development of
the city over the period to 2039. Public consultation, seeking
views on the ‘soundness’ of the Plan will take place
before it is submitted to the Government for public
examination.
|
|
|
|
|
5.3.4
|
Several
important factors have determined the growth plan and overall
spatial strategy proposed in the Draft Sheffield
Plan:
a) Under the
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), strategic policies in
the local plan do not have to meet the objectively assessed needs
for housing and other uses if expansion of the urban areas is
constrained by Green Belt. The Green Belt Review shows that almost
all the land designated as Green Belt continues to perform at least
one of the purposes of Green Belt.
b) Releasing
greenfield land in the Green Belt for development now has a high
risk of undermining efforts to reuse the substantial supply of
brownfield sites in the City Centre and other parts of the urban
area. It would also cause significant harm to the city’s
biodiversity and would undermine the city’s reputation as the
‘Outdoor City’. The adverse impacts of meeting the full
need therefore significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits
of meeting the need for housing and other development when all
factors are considered.
c) Employment
land needs can be met within the existing urban areas. Allocated
sites and sites with planning permission provide almost 14 years
supply of employment land. Additional supply required to meet needs
to 2039 will be met through ‘churn’ of land
(‘windfalls’) within existing employment
areas.
d) Demographic
analysis by Iceni Projects (see paragraph 1.6.5- 1.6.7 above) shows
that the city’s economic growth plans require an annual
housing requirement within the range 1,994-2,323 homes per year and
that this can be achieved by developing land within the existing
urban areas. No harm would therefore be caused by setting the
housing requirement at the level (2,100 homes per year) proposed in
the Draft Plan.
e) Proposed
allocated Housing Sites and sites with planning permission provide
capacity for 27,625 homes (equivalent to over 13 years supply based
on the proposed housing requirement in the Draft Plan). Windfalls
and developable land (particularly within identified ‘Broad
Locations for Growth’) will provide sufficient supply to last
to 2039.
f) There are
clear benefits in terms of reducing carbon emissions by focussing a
large proportion of the housing growth in higher density
developments in the Central Sub-Area – where there are
greater opportunities to walk, cycle or use public transport to
access, jobs, shops and services.
Developing sites on the edge of the built-up areas leads to a
greater need to travel and potentially requires new transport
infrastructure.
g) Adopted local
plans elsewhere in South Yorkshire and Derbyshire currently provide
‘headroom’ in terms of meeting the Government’s
annual housing need figure across the wider city
region.
|
|
|
|
|
5.3.5
|
The development
management policies in the Draft Plan take into
account the viability of development and strike an
appropriate balance between different plan objectives – in
particular, reducing carbon dioxide emissions, delivery of
affordable housing and provision of wheelchair adaptable and
accessible dwellings.
|
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
Alternatives Considered and Rejected
|
|
|
|
|
5.4.1
|
All local planning authorities are
expected produce a local plan for their area. The Government has
stated its intention to intervene in plan making where a local
planning authority fails to produce a plan and keep it up to date.
In effect, this would mean the Government would take over planning
for the area if the Sheffield Plan is not
produced.
|
|
5.4.2
|
Under the latest Government
statements, local planning authorities will be required, as a
minimum, to ensure that there is a plan in place which addresses
the strategic priorities for their area (e.g. housing need). The strategic plan can be
produced by local planning authorities working together or
independently, in the form of a joint or individual local plan.
They may also be produced by an elected Mayor or combined authority
in the form of a spatial development framework (where plan-making
powers have been conferred). Currently, although some discussion
has taken place, none of these alternative arrangements have been
agreed between the authorities in the Sheffield City Region as part
of the duty to cooperate. They could, however, provide an
alternative way of planning for the city and the wider city region
in the future.
|
|
5.4.3
|
The Draft
Sheffield Plan includes strategic priorities but also includes
local policies which allocate sites and deal with more detailed
development management issues. Local policies are also produced in
neighbourhood plans prepared by a neighbourhood planning group (a
parish or town council, or a neighbourhood forum). Two
neighbourhood plans have already been adopted but, currently, only
a handful of neighbourhood plans are being prepared in Sheffield.
The number could, however, rise in the future. But it’s
unlikely that full coverage will be achieved across the city,
meaning there will continue to be a need for local policies
prepared by the City Council.
|
|
|
|
|
5.4.4
|
The various
alternative options regarding the scale and location of future
development have already been described in section 1 above. Public
consultation on the Issues and Options has enabled all the key
strategic options to be fully considered. We have highlighted the
key choice about whether Sheffield should seek to meet all its own
housing needs within the district or seek to accommodate some of it
elsewhere in the city region. It is worth noting that Rotherham,
Barnsley and North East Derbyshire
Councils have already deleted land from the Green Belt in order to
meet their own housing needs. The Draft Sheffield Plan proposes to
provide sufficient new homes to support the city’s jobs
growth economic aspirations. Providing more homes in line with the
Government’s objectively assessed need figure would mean
either providing more land for employment uses or lead to outward
commuting from Sheffield as people take up jobs in neighbouring
districts. The option of providing more land is restricted by the
Green Belt.
|
|
|
|
|
5.4.5
|
The main
alternative to consider with many of the development management
policies and site allocations is whether to have them or not.
However, for a number of the policies,
economic viability considerations have meant that choices have had
to be made between the achievement of better design standards and
delivery of higher numbers of affordable homes. This has already
been discussed in section 1.9 above.
|
PDF 1013 KB