Decisions

8.1

The government have made provision for an Asylum Dispersal Grant to be paid to Local Authorities, along with additional funding to ‘recognise the existing contribution and longstanding support’ of local authorities accommodating asylum seekers.

The purpose of the report sought endorsement by the committee of the proposed allocation of funding from the grant to support development of capacity to promote strong city leadership, a stepping-stone towards growth within the VCFS and strategic work to ensure a good quality, consistent and effective response to those seeking asylum and refuge in the city

8.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Communities, Parks and Leisure Policy Committee:-

1.     Endorses the use of the Asylum Dispersal Grant and Asylum Dispersal funding to be utilised as detailed in this report, with the purpose of:

·       Providing funding for the continuation of the current Communities Asylum & Migration team function to continue beyond March 2023.

·       Supporting identified partners to provide strategically important, good quality services known to benefit those seeking asylum and sanctuary.

·       Provide an Open Grant Pot for bids from a broad range of organisations working for the benefit of the asylum and refugee community.

2.     Approves the Council acting as accountable body for this purpose.

8.3

Reasons for Decision

8.3.1

Given what we know about current numbers in the national, and local asylum estate, retention of refugees in the city and the importance of developing support for refugees to achieve socio-economic success, it is vital that we look beyond short-term demand regarding placement and care of asylum seekers in the city.

8.3.2

This funding is an opportunity to think not only operationally, but strategically to maximise impact for the city in the longer term.

8.3.3

This funding will be significant to enable systemic change and an important step in placing the foundations for an integrated, prosperous, inclusive city.

8.3.4

The recommendation will support development of capacity to promote strong city leadership, a stepping-stone towards growth within the VCFS and strategic work to ensure a good quality, consistent and effective response to those seeking asylum and refuge in the city.

8.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

8.4.1

The Asylum Dispersal Grant will enable Sheffield to begin to address systemic inequality between asylum seekers and those who have sought refugee status and sanctuary via other routes of entry, including provision of wrap support for this vulnerable group. Given the clear benefit, other potential action e.g. to decline the funding, was rejected.

13.1

This report brought the Committee up to date with the Council’s financial position as at Month 6 2022/23.

13.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Communities, Parks and Leisure Policy Committee:-

1.     Note the Council’s financial position as at the end of September 2022 (month 6).

13.3

Reasons for Decision

13.3.1

The paper is to brought the committee up to date with the Council’s current financial position as at Month 6 2022/23.

13.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

13.4.1

The Council is required to both set a balance budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

12.1

The report sought approval for an increase in allotment rent and water charges for 2024/2025 by 5.5% (an increase below current inflation).

12.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Communities, Parks and Leisure Policy Committee:-

1.     That the rent for allotments in 2024/2025 is increased by 5.5%

2.     That this increase is at a below-inflation increase for 2024/2025 only, due to the current cost of living crisis.

12.3

Reasons for Decision

12.3.1

The recommendation to increase the rents by 5.5% in 2024/25 protects the delivery of the service to a degree, whilst taking account of the results of consultation.

12.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

12.4.1

Rents could be left at the same level. However due to inflation this would effectively be akin to a reduction in budget; quite a significant one due to the current high level of inflation. This was rejected because the current allotment budget is not felt to be larger than needed. A significant reduction in budget would decrease the level of service and site improvements.

12.4.2

An increase of 9.4% in line with inflation was initially considered, however this was rejected following the outcomes of consultation.

12.4.3

Rents could be increased by a larger amount, but this would go against the outcomes of the consultation. Considering the results of the consultation questionnaire in January 2018, discussions at the Allotment Advisory Group, the survey of October 2022 and the need to deliver the service, an increase of 5.5% (below inflation) has emerged as the overall preferred option.

11.1

The report provided an update to members of the Communities, Parks and Leisure Committee on progress made towards implementing the outcomes of the Leisure Review Report which was approved by the Co-operative Executive in November 2021. Including progress towards appointing a new operator for Sport, Leisure and Entertainment Venues from September 2024.

11.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Communities, Parks and Leisure Policy Committee:-

1.     That members of the Communities, Parks and Leisure Committee note the content of the report, including the envisaged approach to procurement and the inclusion of social outcome requirements within the Specification for Services.

11.3

Reasons for Decision

11.3.1

It is expected that development of the Procurement Strategy and detailed Specification for Services will help to enhance the offer to customers and communities. An improved offer will attract and retain increased participation and usage of venues.

11.3.2

The Leisure Review approved in November 2021 has shown that the procurement of an external partner from 2024 is the most financially advantageous and returns the highest level of income to the Council.

11.3.3

The external procurement exercise will also provide a greater level of financial certainty as a management fee will be set as part of the contract procurement and financial risk can be transferred to the external partner.

11.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

11.4.1

The Council has reviewed three possible options for the future management of facilities. This included in house, a Local Authority Trading Company (LATC) and appointment of an external partner. The in house and LATC options were not selected as they are more expensive and present a greater level of financial uncertainty and risk to the Council.

10.1

The report sought approval of a site selection and community engagement approach for the PlayZones funding programme.

A PlayZones funding stream was launched by the Football Foundation in 2022, the funding is used to create safe, inclusive, and accessible outdoor sports facilities that bring communities together through recreational forms of football and a range of other sports and physical activities. The fund will enable the refurbishment and creation of multi use games areas across the City.

10.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Communities, Parks and Leisure Policy Committee:-

1.     Approve the proposed approach to:

a.     site selection as set out in the report.

b.     community engagement outlined in the report.

2.     Notes:

a.     the proposed consortium approach to the development of the funding application.

b.     that a final list of sites will be reported to the Communities, Parks and Leisure Committee.

c.     that if secured, any capital funding associated with this funding will be presented to the Strategy and Resources Committee for approval.

10.3

Reasons for Decision

10.3.1

The Football Foundation Playzones Programme provides an opportunity for us to increase the quality and usability of a significant number of multi-use games areas across the city.

10.3.2

The PlayZones programme will enable us to provide facilities and activities for communities and target groups who currently face barriers to getting active. This will enable us to tackle inequalities.

10.3.3

The site selection and community engagement approach outlined in the above report is required to ensure we identify the most feasible sites that can reach our target groups; are supported by local communities; are able to be effectively activated via our partner organisations and can pass the through planning and design phase successfully.

10.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

10.4.1

The option of not applying for the PlayZones programme has been considered. This has been rejected as it would mean we do not secure a significant amount of investment into Sheffield outdoor sport facilities, which is a key priority in our Sport and Leisure Strategy. The condition of multi-use games areas would not be improved, gaps in provision could not be resolved and those communities who most need these facilities and their activation would miss out on this opportunity.

9.1

The report updated the Policy Committee on the progress of the 2023/24 budget process.

The appendix contained specific budget proposals that the Committee were asked to endorse.

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Communities, Parks and Leisure Policy Committee:-

1.     Note the update on the Council’s 2023/24 budget position.

2.     Endorse the budget proposals set out in Appendix 1.

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

The Council is required by law to set a balanced budget each year. This report is pursuant to that objective and is in line with the process and timetable agreed by the Strategy and Resources Committee on 31 May 2022 and 5 July 2022.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

The Council is required to both set a balance budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

10.1

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Finance and Commercial Services providing an update on the progress of the 2023/24 budget process.

The report indicated that the financial pressures facing the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee in 2023/24 amounted to £12.4m.  Mitigations of £6.9m had been noted at the previous meeting of the Committee, leaving further savings of £5.5m needing to be found, and it was reported that this figure had now reduced to £3.4m in the light of further mitigations which had recently been endorsed by members of the Committee from all three political groups on the Council.

10.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee notes the update on the Council’s budget position for 2023/24.

10.3

Reasons for Decision

The Council is required by law to set a balanced budget each year. This report is pursuant to that objective and is in line with the process and timetable agreed by the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee on 31 May 2022 and 5 July 2022.

10.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

The Council is required to both set a balanced budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

9.1

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Children’s Servicesseeking approval to commission an extension to the current Supported Accommodation (young people 16 to 25 years) Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) contract for Looked After Children and Care Leavers,for 18 months from 1^st April 2023 to 30^th September 2024. The current term of the contract is 1^st August 2019 to 1^st April 2023 (4 years), and the value of the extension is estimated to be £8.4m.

Arising from a question regarding quality assurance, the Committee was informed of the activities undertaken to ensure high quality support and accommodation was provided for Looked After Children and Care Leavers in the city, which included:-

·       For 16 & 17 year olds, a pathway plan and care plan for care leavers, overseen by a social worker, and continued access to an independent reviewing officer, meaning that individual needs are reviewed regularly.

·       Strong liaison between children’s services and the commissioning team in relation to sharing key intelligence, identifying and acting on any concerns identified; undertaking of regular spot checks of accommodation; and receipt of regular feedback from social workers and the Leaving Care service.

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

(a) approves the commission of an 18-month extension (1 April 2023 – 30 September 2024) of the current Supported Accommodation (young people 16 - 25 years) DPS, with such variation having an estimated value of £8.4m;

(b) requests the Director of Children’s Services to consider, as part of the re-commissioning exercise, how providers who either lease the tenancies or own the buildings can be encouraged to be as environmentally-friendly as they possibly can; and

(c) supports the principle of the introduction of an Ofsted inspection regime for Supported Accommodation.

9.3

Reasons for Decision

Commissioning an extension to the existing arrangements will ensure our statutory duty continues to be met whilst allowing time for a full re-commissioning exercise to be undertaken.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

Not to proceed with an extension to the contract - the alternative option considered is not to proceed with the proposed extension, however, this raises the risk of an appropriately specified and monitored contract not being in place, which would be in breach of the Contract Procedure Rules (2015).

9.4.2

Additionally, the Local Authority will not be compliant in relation to its statutory duties to provide appropriate accommodation to Looked After Children and Care Leavers, therefore, this option is not recommended.

9.4.3

There are no additional implications arising out of the request to extend the current contract.

8.1

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Children’s Services seeking agreement to proceed with secondary school expansion plans in Planning Area 5 in the east of the city, to address the forecast deficit of places in 2023/24 due to new housing and population growth.

Arising from consideration of the proposals in the report, the Director of Children’s Services agreed to:-

·       Arrange for school and early years’ provision maps to be published on the Council’s website; and

·       Ensure that details of the planning work being undertaken with adjacent local authorities be included within the report to be submitted to the December meeting of the Committee on mainstream sufficiency, which will provide an overview of the 3 year strategy to ensure sufficient provision across early years, childcare, primary, secondary and post-16 provision.

8.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee:-

(a) agrees the proposed secondary school expansion plans in Planning Area 5, which will enable the Local Authority to fulfil its statutory duty and ensure sufficient secondary places are available to meet the forecast demand in 2023/24; and

(b) agrees for up to £5.5m of the remaining balance of Basic Need funding to be utilised to fund the proposed expansions.

8.3

Reasons for Decision

8.3.1

The proposed expansions in Planning Area 5 will contribute to:-

·       Need for places: without additional places in the area, the impact on families of not getting a local place will be significant as well as the impact on neighbouring schools.

·       Children’s outcomes: the standard of education that are provided at the two schools is of a good quality – both schools are rated by Ofsted as “Good.”

·       Equality: the catchment area is characterised by deprivation and a higher proportion of Black and Minority Ethnic population. By increasing places at these two schools the needs of all children are met, in particular the needs of more vulnerable children and families located in the city.

8.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

8.4.1

A detailed Options Appraisal was undertaken to consider alternative options to help address the secondary deficits from 2023/24 onwards. This is set out in Annex 1 of the report.

11.1

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Finance and Commercial Services providing an update on the Council’s financial monitoring position for 2022/23, as at Month 6 (30^th September 2022).

The report indicated that the Council was forecasting an £18.6m overspend against the 2022/23 budget as at month 6, of which £6.5m related to services within the remit of the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee, and further detail on the breakdown of that overspend was set out in the report.

The Committee confirmed that, whilst work would continue on developing plans to mitigate in-year forecast overspends, as well as pressures on the 2023/24 budget, the safety of children in the city would remain of paramount consideration.

11.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Education, Children and Families Policy Committee notes the Council’s financial position as at the end of September 2022 (month 6).

11.3

Reasons for Decision

This paper is to bring the Committee up to date with the Council’s current financial position as at Month 6 2022/23.

11.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

The Council is required to both set a balanced budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

14.1

The Housing Investment Programme (Capital) brings together the 30-year Asset Management Strategy for Council Housing that sets out the priorities for investment and, to ensure that homes meet the Government’s Decent Homes Standard and, delivery of tenants’ priorities to improve the quality of homes and neighbourhoods. Investment priorities are formulated from detailed stock condition and other surveys to ensure effective planning of works, repairs intelligence, life-cycle modelling and, feedback from tenants.

The Housing Investment Programme is co-designed and agreed with tenants for Council Housing stock.

The Housing Capital Programme is split into three distinct areas of activity; Council Housing Investment (existing stock and assets) and the Council’s Stock Increase Programme, funded from the Council’s Housing Revenue Account, as described in the annual HRA Business Plan. There is also the Non-HRA Capital Programme which includes the Programme Management, Homes & Loans to private homes and investment in private homes. The table at 1.8 how the overall Housing Capital Programme split between Council Housing Investment, Stock Increase and Non-HRA areas of the programme.

The purpose of the report was to provide an update of the progress against the approved 2022/23 Housing Investment Programme, this is reported regularly as part of the Council’s Corporate Capital Programme to Strategy and Resources Committee normally on a quarterly basis. The report focussed on providing an update with regard to spend and progress against the 22/23 Housing Investment Programme as at September 2022. The report also provided an update of the 5- year Housing Investment Programme.

14.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Housing Policy Committee:-

1.     Note the 2022-23 Housing Capital Programme forecasting and budget position at the end of period 6.

14.3

Reasons for Decision

14.3.1

The report was to provide the Housing Policy Committee members with an update on progress against the approved 5-year approved Capital programme.

14.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

14.4.1

No alternative options were considered as part of the update report.

10.1

The report provided the Housing Policy Committee with a copy of the response to the Secretary of State on changes to the Rent Standard. The response was approved in October by the Chair and Vice Chair of the Housing Policy Committee in conjunction with the Leader to meet the consultation deadline and submitted on behalf of Sheffield City Council.

10.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Housing Policy Committee:-

1.     Notes the response that was submitted and the implications on the Housing Revenue Account that were highlighted.

2.     Notes that a further report will be submitted to the Housing Policy Committee once the outcomes of the consultation are known to inform a decision regarding council housing rents for 2023/24.

10.3

Reasons for Decision

10.3.1

Members are asked to note the response provided and the potential impacts on the Housing Revenue Account noted in the response. The Council are unable to set rents for council housing until the outcome of the consultation is known. A further report will be required to the Housing Policy Committee and/or to Strategy and Resources Committee to confirm council housing rents for 2022/23 depending on when the final determination is issued.

10.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

10.4.1

The Secretary of State provided the opportunity for Registered Providers to respond to their consultation proposals. There are significant potential implications arising from the proposals, so it was important for the Council to respond to highlight these to the government in the required timescales.

12.1

The report sought approval to appoint a Task and Finish Group to oversee work to develop a new Housing Strategy. Membership will be drawn from the Housing Policy Committee. The Terms of Reference of the Group were appended to the report.

12.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Housing Policy Committee:-

1.     Approve the appointment of a Task and Finish Group on the terms described in this report to oversee work to develop a new Housing Strategy

12.3

Reasons for Decision

12.3.1

The Task and Finish Group will bring together a small, focused group of members to examine key housing policy issues and provide clear advice to officers developing the strategy. Cross party representation will mean that political agreement is reached at an early stage of the process allowing the strategy to progress. This has been a significant barrier to the Strategy’s development in the past.

12.3.2

The group will feedback advice given, and progress on the work programme to the Housing Policy Committee, so the Committee can make informed decisions on the Housing Strategy.

12.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

12.4.1

An alternative would be to deliver a series of Knowledge Briefings for the Housing Policy Committee. This was rejected as it would not enable constructive debate and advice to be provided to officers.

11.1

The Report sought approval to elect to operate an Introductory Tenancies regime for all new council tenants. The Report outlined the statutory framework under which the council may choose to operate Introductory Tenancies, and the rationale for taking that course of action.

11.2

RESOLVED: That the Housing Policy Committee:-

1.     To approve the adoption and operation of an Introductory Tenancies regime (ITR), the key consequence of which would be that all new council tenants would be on a non-secure tenancy for the initial probationary period (12 to 18 months). The aim will be to implement this change on or after 01/04/2023.

11.3

Reasons for Decision

11.3.1

The recommendation of the paper is to adopt an Introductory Tenancies regime. It is vital that SCC take every action to effectively manage the increasingly scarce supply of social housing in the city. The policy allows us to do this better by allowing SCC to make use of streamlined legal pathways to seeking possession of a property where there have been serious breaches of the tenancy agreement – something other Local Authorities in core cities are making use of currently. Further, it would bring SCC in line with registered providers in the city and other South Yorkshire local authorities, meaning that Sheffield would no longer be making the necessary process of seeking possession of tenancies harder than it is for our peer organisations and operating a more generous regime. Finally, the consultation undertaken clearly illustrates the desire of the public and our tenants to implement a policy of this nature, reinforcing the notion that people are at the heart of what we do and that we listen to our customers in making decisions. Adopting this policy would signal to our tenants and other customers that we are committed to taking action, when necessary, in a fair, consistent and proportionate manner and is therefore the recommendation of the paper.

11.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

11.4.1

The primary alternate option is ‘do nothing’ and opt not to implement an Introductory Tenancies regime. The decision to adopt is discretionary, meaning the Council is not required to do so. The Council has been operating without Introductory Tenancies since their introduction in legislation, and therefore this is considered a viable option. However, this option is not recommended, as it would deny the Council a useful tenancy management tool at a time when effective management of our housing stock is increasing in both difficulty and importance. Further, it would not be taking all possible steps to improve customer outcomes when there is strong tenant voice to have a fair and effective approach to dealing with violations of tenancy agreements, as demonstrated by the fact that a large majority of those consulted were in favour of this policy.

9.1

The report provided a breakdown of the pressures and mitigation/savings options for the Housing Revenue Account in 2023/24. Members were asked to endorse the mitigation options presented in the paper.

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Housing Policy Committee:-

1. Endorses the Housing Revenue Account savings proposals/mitigations as set out in this report and recommends to the Strategy and Resources Committee that they be approved as part of the Council’s budget for 2023/24

2. Request a further report on the Housing Revenue Account Business plan at their February meeting with details of the full capital and revenue expenditure proposals for 2023/24

3. Acknowledge that the final decision on council housing rents will be taken at the Full Council in February once the outcome of the government consultation on the Rent Standard is known.

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

Members were asked to note the unsustainable financial position highlighted by the medium-term financial analysis presented to Strategy and Resources Committee in July 2022. The report and its recommendations, set out the scale of the challenge ahead, the limited resources available and the difficult decisions that need to be taken to deliver a balanced HRA budget for 2023/24.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

The Council is required to both set a balanced HRA budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

8.1

The report updated the Policy Committee on the progress of the 2023/24 budget process. The appendix contained specific budget proposals that the Housing Policy Committee were asked to endorse.

8.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Housing Policy Committee:-

1.     Note the update on the Council’s 2023/24 budget position.

2.     Endorse the budget proposals set out in Appendix 1

8.3

Reasons for Decision

8.3.1

The Council is required by law to set a balanced budget each year. This report is pursuant to that objective and is in line with the process and timetable agreed by the Strategy and Resources Committee on 31 May 2022 and 5 July 2022.

8.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

8.4.1

The Council is required to both set a balance budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

13.1

The report brought the Committee up to date with the Council’s financial position as at Month 6 2022/23 including General Fund revenue position, Housing Revenue Account

13.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Housing Policy Committee:-

1.     Note the Council’s financial position as at the end of September 2022 (month 6).

13.3

Reasons for Decision

13.3.1

This paper was to bring the committee up to date with the Council’s current financial position as at Month 6 2022/23 including Revenue General Fund and Housing Revenue Account.

13.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

13.4.1

The Council is required to both set a balance budget and to ensure that in-year income and expenditure are balanced. No other alternatives were considered.

5.1

The content of the report and associated Appendix is 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’). The recommendations in the report were agreed by the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee on 3rd November 2022.

The report in the Appendix was considered by the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee and 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.

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.