You are here: Home » Your City Council » Council Meetings » Area Panels » Darnall » Agenda 25th March 2004 » Development at Waverley
Proposals for Development at Waverley
HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
REPORT TO CABINET
10th SEPTEMBER 03
PROPOSALS FOR DEVELOPMENT AT WAVERLEY
1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 This report outlines proposals for redevelopment at Waverley contained in a recently published Masterplan and proposes a City Council response to them.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 The principal gateway to our city is the Sheffield Parkway. On leaving the M1 motorway at junction 33, views to the south are dominated by massive opencast coal extraction at Waverley. This site lies in Rotherham Borough but in fact is closer to Sheffield city centre than Rotherham town centre.
2.2 As coal extraction and compaction is completed so UK Coal (the owners and operators of the site) are restoring land for future use. The site extends to almost 300 hectares. Development is already underway at the northern end of site (adjoining Sheffield Parkway) and it is envisaged construction on the site will continue through to 2015.
2.3 In order to inform site restoration, provision of infrastructure and roll out of new development, UK Coal has appointed a group of consultants (led by Fuller Peiser) to produce a Masterplan for the site. A copy has been lodged in the members’ library. Broadly speaking employment uses are proposed at the northern end of the site (involving over 180,000 sq meters of industrial and commercial floorspace) with housing in the middle (involving some 3700 dwellings) with open space and a lake to the south. The proposals contained in the Masterplan are outlined in some detail in the next section of this report.
2.4 UK Coal and their consultants have undertaken an extensive public consultation exercise on the Masterplan –in both Rotherham and south east Sheffield. This exercise, including meetings in Darnall and Handsworth, is outlined in section 3 of this report.
2.5 Section 4 provides a suggested City Council response to Rotherham MBC (as planning authority for this area) on the Masterplan’s proposals. As appropriate, reference is made to concerns expressed at the two public meetings in Darnall and Handsworth and to issues raised by members of the City Centre and East Area Board who considered the Masterplan’s proposals at its meeting on 26 August. Rotherham MBC in turn will report these (and other) comments to their cabinet and use them in the development of their Local Development Framework (successor to their Unitary Development Plan) and in advising UK Coal on subsequent applications for planning permission required before development can proceed.
3.0 THE MASTERPLAN’S PROPOSAL
3.1 The key features of the Masterplan are:
· A high-density mixed-use development involving over 48has of business & industry and other commercial development (creating an estimated 7000 jobs) and 3700 dwellings (accommodating a resident population of over 8,100 people) all within a landscaped setting.
- Three high-density developed nodes providing hubs for public
transport and locations for three local centres.
- The concentration of employment development on the northern part of
site (the Advanced Manufacturing Park – a joint venture by UK Coal and Yorkshire Forward) and around public transport hubs.
- Residential development concentrated to the south of the employment
development.
- A mix of uses between concentrations of employment and residential
development which, the consultants claim, will reduce the need to travel
and will provide the flexibility to accommodate changing market and planning
requirements.
- The creation of a park providing a natural link for pedestrians and
cyclists between the development and lake and parkland
to the south of the residential development.
- A well connected street grid pattern, providing convenient and direct
routes for pedestrians and cyclist with all built development within a
maximum of 800m to a public transport stop, local centre and school,
with most housing development within 400m of those facilities.
- The creation of transport links to the surrounding network for pedestrians,
cyclists, bus and car users, incorporating a potential new Supertram extension linking Sheffield and Rotherham.
- The identification of a potential location for a new passenger rail station and temporary/permanent Park and Ride facility (if appropriate)
- The potential to create a link road integrated into the development providing a connection between the B6200 an Sheffield Parkway, acting both as a through route and providing internal distribution.
The layout of these land uses is shown on the attached plan taken from the Masterplan - Fig 66.
3.2 Rotherham’s Unitary Development Plan identifies Waverley as lying
within a Strategic Regeneration Area. The northern part of the site is
allocated for business and industry. The central part of site is shown as white land (i.e. without a specified land use) and the southern part as green belt and major potential recreational area.
3.3 UK Coal’s consultants have indicated that full environmental and transport impact assessments will follow the publication of the Masterplan – and that both will be subject to further public consultation.
3.4 The consultants have also indicated that the development of the site will be progressed either through the submission of an application for outline planning permission or through an Area Action Plan as part of Rotherham MBC’s forthcoming Local Development Framework.
4.0 PUBLIC CONSULTATION
4.1 An extensive public consultation exercise ran from mid June to mid August. Two community meetings took place in Sheffield: one in Darnall on 17th July and another in Handsworth on 22nd July. Reference is made to comments made at these two meetings in the following section.
4.2. In addition a brochure produced by UK Coal describing the Masterplan’s proposals and inviting comments was sent to local ward councillors and to city wide organisations and organisations and individuals in south east Sheffield who had made representations during the preparation of Sheffield’s UDP.
4.3 Finally, presentation/display boards have been set up at a number of venues in south east Sheffield.
5.0 PROPOSED RESPONSE TO THE MASTERPLAN
5.1 I propose that the following points are made as the City Council’s representations on the Masterplan:
General Comment
a) Sheffield City Council recognises the important role that new uses at Waverley could play in regenerating the Sheffield/Rotherham conurbation and adjoining communities by providing new employment opportunities, new homes and green space on an existing brownfield site. The Council welcomes the opportunity to comment on the Masterplan and looks forward to continued cross boundary working on developments that will impact on both districts. At both meetings in south east Sheffield the proposal was cautiously welcomed as potentially providing new jobs, facilities and recreational opportunities. Concerns were however expressed at the possibility that areas around could receive many disbenefits of new development nearby with few benefits coming to deprived communities in the area. I therefore welcome the consultants assurances at the public meeting in Darnall that UK Coal expect planning gain to feature as part of securing planning permission. The Council would expect them to provide affordable social and elderly housing mix and training for local people so that they are best able to take advantage of new employment opportunities.
Development Plan Issues
b) 3700 dwellings are proposed in the Masterplan. This is a significant amount of new housing. A factor governing the need for more housing in Rotherham is the supply of land in adjoining districts (i.e. in some cases, needs could be met in an adjoining district). If, as seems likely, there are a lot of previously developed sites available within the existing urban area of Sheffield, it may be premature to allow an urban extension at Waverley, even if it is utilising previously developed land. Such a situation could be in conflict with the Regional Planning Guidance, as the priority is to concentrate new housing development within existing urban areas which both Rotherham MBC and I do not consider this site to be. The release of land at Waverley for housing therefore needs to take account of the relative sustainability and phasing of sites within the whole South Yorkshire market area. I propose that this is closely examined by the two authorities in the preparation of our respective Local Development Frameworks and informed by Sheffield’s preliminary urban capacity study (completed in 2001) and Rotherham’s capacity study (due to be completed in September).
c) Another important issue concerns the potential impact of the new housing on the South Yorkshire Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder. This issue was raised by the City Centre and East Area Planning Board. There is a risk that large scale housing development at Waverley could hinder the regeneration of low demand housing areas within the Pathfinder area. This issue needs to be addressed as part of the research into housing markets that will inform the HMR Pathfinder Strategy (due to be published later this year). Careful phasing of housing development at Waverley is likely to be necessary to ensure that HMR objectives are not undermined.
With one of the key objectives of the Pathfinder Initiative being long term sustainability of the housing sector and community, there is a real need to address concerns of the additional pressure that the scale of extra dwellings will have on education and health care provision. Again, this point was raised at the City Centre and East Area Planning Board at its meeting on 26th August. The education issue should be considered not only in the light of numerical pupil places and location of schools, but also, of potential choice and the consequential impact on all schools in the hinterland area. The location and type of health car provision will also need to be assessed to ensure a proper range of facilities and services, both for new residents and existing areas affected.
d) The Masterplan indicates that the Green Belt boundary is to be redrawn but does not indicate where the new boundary will be. (This will no doubt become clear when Rotherham MBC produces its draft Local Development Framework). It is vital that the boundary is contiguous with the city’s green belt where open country to be protected by this designation crosses the city/borough boundary.
Proposed access from the Woodhouse Mill area at the southern end of the site will traverse a sports/recreational area owned and managed by Sheffield City Council. The impact of the proposed highway on these facilities and adjacent local community facilities will need to be assessed.
Transportation Issues
e) The Masterplan deals inadequately with the transportation issues arising from the proposed development. This is acknowledged by UK Coal’s consultants who have provided assurance that transport impact and how to mitigate against its effects will be fully addressed - see para 3.3above.
Of particular concern is:
i. The impact on the Parkway/Poplar Way junction, the Sheffield Parkway itself, junction 33 of the M1, and adjoining communities - and what measures are required to offset this impact together with who will bear the cost. (Concern at the potential impact of this development was made forcefully at both public meetings in Sheffield). The City Centre and East Area Planning Board also expressed concern that development here could be at the expense of economic development at other key sites in the South Yorkshire Technology Corridor, given the limited existing and future capacity on the motorway and its junctions.
ii. The appropriateness of the Supertram route shown in the Masterplan which differs from the proposed SYPTE route.
iii. The timing of new infrastructure provision.
iv. Public transport provision prior to the development of a new rail station and (possible) construction of Supertram through the site, in order that the opportunity to create a truly sustainable development is not lost.
v. The need for good park and ride facilities at the new rail station and possible additional bus services prior to the construction of Supertram.
vi. The acknowledgement that a Supertram system will not satisfy the needs of all travelers and that these needs will have to be met through improved and co-ordinated bus services. This will particularly be the case for linkages between Tinsley, Darnall and Meadowhall.
Landscaping and Air Quality Issues
f) The Masterplan refers to the “creation of a new landscape” and suggests a number of key objectives. The main reference appears to be towards restoring the naturalistic landscape taken from the surrounding vegetation. This seems to take account of the wider landscape and the imposition of development into its setting. It would be a useful addition to refer to how the landscape strategy would extend to the housing and employment areas as well as the open spaces to include a more formal/hierarchical planting style which gives distinct characters to these areas. It will also be vital to ensure that the hard and soft landscaping structure is designed in accordance with principles to minimise crime, and what future management and maintenance arrangements are built into the concept at the very outset. These matters are particularly relevant to the recreation lake.
g) Concern was expressed at the Darnall meeting about the safety of containment cells under the viewpoint (area 6 on Fig 66 attached). UK Coal indicated that the cells were sealed and waterproof and were subject to a waste management licence and a bond tied to their security. Assurances will need to be fully examined when the forthcoming environmental impact assessment is received. Residents of Woodhouse Mill also expressed concern at the prospects of the proposed spine road crossing the recreation ground on Retford Road (bottom right of Fig 66).
h) Finally, no reference is made in the Masterplan as to how development at this site will impact on the already poor air quality in the vicinity of Junction 33(and possibly around Junction 34) of the M1. Extra traffic from the site will almost certainly exacerbate levels of pollution in the M1 Air Quality Management Area. This will need to be addressed in the forthcoming Environmental Impact Assessment referred to in paragraph 3.3 above.
6.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
6.1 There are no financial implications as a direct result of this report. Improved public transport and highway measures in Sheffield – and their respective financing – will need to be fully addressed as part of the determination of planning applications for development at Waverley and through the preparation and monitoring of the South Yorkshire Local Transport Plan.
7.0 EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES
7.1 There are no equal opportunity issues arising from this report.
8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS
8.1 The restoration and development of Waverley provides a significant opportunity for turning a major eyesore on the most important approach to the city into a bold, imaginative and sustainable setting for new development in the new century. Issues relating to landscaping have been referred to in
paragraph 5.1(f-h) above and the City Council will wish to comment on the environmental impact assessment when available.
9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1 It is recommended that the Cabinet:
i. Notes the importance of the proposed redevelopment at Waverley to the regeneration of South Yorkshire;
ii. Advise UK Coal and Rotherham MBC of the need to maximise this opportunity in the social, economic and environmental regeneration of the Sheffield/Rotherham conurbation;
iii. Endorses the views on the Masterplan contained in this report, and for these to be conveyed to UK Coal, its consultants and Rotherham MBC;
iv. Looks forward to continued discussion on proposals for this site and in particular, the proposed environmental and transport impact assessments to be undertaken in the near future.
David Curtis
Head of Development Services
11th August, 2003
How useful is this page?