You are here: Home » Your City Council » Council Meetings » Cabinet » Agendas 2007 » Agenda 26 September 2007 » River Don District Masterplan
Report to Cabinet re River Don District Masterplan
DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
REPORT TO CABINET 26 SEPTEMBER 2007
RIVER DON DISTRICT MASTERPLAN
1. PURPOSE
1.1 To report progress on the River Don District Masterplan produced by Urban Strategies Inc. of Canada (USI) for British Land.
1.2 To seek the Cabinet’s endorsement in principle of the Masterplan proposals taking into account the comments contained in this report and to identify areas for further work and future public consultation.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 The River Don District Masterplan forms the output of the second stage of the Lower Don Valley Vision & Masterplan project. Development of the original LDV masterplan started in December 2003 and has resulted in the publication of the LDV Vision and Masterplan Report in November 2004. Since publication, the principles of the LDV Vision have been formally endorsed by the Council in May 2005.
2.2 The River Don District Masterplan has been prepared on behalf of The British Land Company PLC by Urban Strategies Inc. This study has been prepared in consultation with Sheffield City Council.
2.3 A copy of the Annotated Masterplan is attached at the end of this Report.
2.4 The Masterplan comprises of:
2.4.1 Main Report by USI – 75 pages
2.4.2 Planning Policy Summary
2.4.3 Socio-Economic Baseline and Masterplan Benefits
2.4.4 Commercial Real Estate Review: The Case for Regeneration
2.4.5 Transportation and Parking Strategy
2.4.6 Open Space Review
2.4.7 Ecology Baseline and Strategy
2.4.8 Flood Risk Assessment
2.4.9 Air Quality Strategy
2.4.10 Sustainability Goals
2.4.11 Noise
2.5 The documents above are available in the Members library and on the Council’s website.
2.6 The following summary of the Masterplan is the subject of this report.
3. THE MASTERPLAN’S STRATEGY
3.1 The River Don District Masterplan is anchored by the five following interlinked themes: -
3.1.1 Making it sustainable: promoting sustainability at all levels:
· as a new employment destination;
· as a new residential community to add diversity to Sheffield’s housing offer;
· as an expanded retail and leisure offer to create an active urban environment and serve new residents, businesses and visitors;
· with a focus on an expanded public transport network;
· with an emphasis on the natural environment, restoring the river and creating quality public spaces.
3.1.2 Making it green: creating quality settings for investment and using best practice in sustainability wherever possible.
3.1.3 Making it connected: creating well connected and integrated business and residential communities.
3.1.4 Making places and creating designations: establishing strong character and new sense of place.
3.1.5 Making a statement of innovation, modernity and success: re-inventing the River Don District as a desirable address for living and business.
4. THE MASTERPLAN AREAS
4.1 The River Don District is divided in to four ‘Character Areas’ with numbers as shown on the attached Annotated Masterplan
4.2 River Don Park (7)
4.2.1 A large regional scale riverside park called River Don Park is proposed. This park will provide a green setting for the new riverside neighbourhoods and existing communities.
4.3 Weedon Street & River Don Place (6 & 17)
4.3.1 Weedon Street will be reinvented as one of the River Don District’s most desirable addresses. The Masterplan proposes that Weedon Street be retained in its current location, but be promoted as a public transport corridor serving the interior areas of the Valley.
4.4 Don Terrace (eastern part of 7)
4.4.1 Don Terrace provides a unique address for more traditional residential living within the core of the masterplan. It is a quiet residential mews, providing access for local residents and service vehicles only.
4.5 Carbrook Square and Bright Street (20 & 23)
4.5.1 At the heart of the Masterplan and acting as the anchor for prestige office development is Carbrook Square and Bright Street axis. As the key entrance into the River Don District from Sheffield Road, Carbrook Square creates a statement of quality and modernity for the Lower Don Valley and provides the main address for premium ‘headquarters style’ office development.
5. TRANSPORT, FLOOD RISK, AIR QUALITY & NOISE
5.1 TRANSPORT
5.1.1 The Masterplan indicates that from a transport perspective the most important aspect is its integrated nature. The land uses and transport elements are inter-dependent, and the transport proposals knit together with the surrounding networks.
5.1.2 The study area has a large highway network incorporating access roads, local roads and the M1. There is also a comprehensive multi-modal public transport network in place throughout the Lower Don Valley which comprises heavy rail, Supertram, bus, coach and Park and Ride. This public transport hub is centred on the Meadowhall Passenger Transport Interchange (PTI).
5.1.3 The M1 motorway runs through the northern tip of the Masterplan Study Area. Through previous work, it has been established that there is little spare capacity at Junction 34 and the Meadowhall and Sheffield Roads. There is however, significant spare capacity on the public transport network.
5.1.4 Supertram:
The existing Supertram route through the Lower Don Valley provides stops mainly at leisure destinations within the Valley which are very peaked in terms of hours of operation (i.e. evening peaks). The Supertram’s route only services the eastern side of the study area.
5.1.5 Rail:
As part of the national rail network, the Meadowhall Interchange provides direct links to both Rotherham Central Station and Barnsley via Chapeltown, and Leeds. There is a high frequency of trains in all directions. There are up to 400 regional train services per day calling at the Interchange. Heavy rail is well used in the masterplan area.
5.1.6 Bus:
Bus services from the PTI serve Sheffield, Rotherham and other nearby towns. At present strategic routes efficiently service the north east -south west Meadowhall Road and Sheffield Road corridors. However, these routes fail to penetrate the peripheral Masterplan areas and make connecting through the area in an east-west fashion impossible without first going into the city centre and transferring services. The PTE and Sheffield and Rotherham Councils are currently investigating possible routing for a Bus Rapid Transit scheme.
5.1.7 Park & Ride:
A local Park & Ride service currently exists at the Meadowhall Interchange. The facility is popular and frequently the car park capacity is reached prior to 08:00 am on weekdays, showing a high demand for the facility which can result in informal use of Meadowhall Shopping Centre parking facilities as an over spill.
5.1.8 Pedestrian and Cycling Routes:
The area is heavily trafficked and as such walking and cycling are modes that suffer from vehicular severance, air quality issues, lack of road space and lack of priority measures. However, cycle and pedestrian provision is of strategic importance and as such requires measures that can enhance and encourage these modes to play a greater role within the Masterplan area. Many of these measures can be undertaken as part of area or company wide Travel Plans.
5.2 FLOOD RISK
5.2.1 Detailed hydraulic modelling has been undertaken using an enhanced version of the EA’s mathematical hydraulic model and topographic survey. This analysis indicates that the majority of the area is in fact outside the 1% annual probability (1 in 100 year) floodplain.
5.2.2 The flood risk is assessed ignoring flood defences, as required by PPS 25. When existing defences are taken into account, the entire portion of the River Don District on the right bank of the River Don is completely defended against flooding to the 1% event, as is most of the left bank.
Areas still identified as being at risk on the left bank are the Forgemasters industrial site, from overtopping of low defences upstream of Abyssinia Bridge and the A6109 Meadowhall Road between Meadowhall Way and the Meadowhall Interchange area.
5.2.3 Substantial effort has been invested in devising a workable and long term solution to flood risk management in the Lower Don Valley, including assessing the impact of climate change.
5.2.4 At the time of drafting the report the risk of flooding at the 1 in 100 year event was confined to two areas on the left bank. To reduce flood risk, the River Don District will include a comprehensive and sustainable flood alleviation scheme that will be fully integrated into the landscape and infrastructure. As part of this scheme, elements will include:
· Improvements to existing flood defences;
· Land raising to reduce residual flood risk;
· Provision of a two-stage channel along sections of the River Don, where environmentally acceptable;
· Provision of flood plain compensation;
· Extreme event flood flow routing within the site;
· Reduction in peak surface water discharge from the development by using sustainable urban drainage methods.
5.3 AIR QUALITY
5.3.1 Air quality in parts of the River Don District currently exceed the national air quality objective, with concentrations of nitrogen dioxide being high in locations close to the major transport corridors, including the M1, Meadowhall Road / Brightside Lane and Sheffield Road/Attercliffe Common.
5.3.2 Air quality typically improves with distance from busy roads. Therefore, the Masterplan has been designed so that no residential development is located along the main transport corridors within the Masterplan area. In particular, no residential development is located close to the M1 motorway.
5.3.3 Baseline conditions across the site and surrounding area are being assessed through a 12-month monitoring programme and baseline modelling. Following this, detailed modelling will be undertaken to assess the impact of the development on air quality.
5.4 NOISE
5.4.1 Noise surveys have been undertaken in and around the River Don District Masterplan site to identify and quantify existing noise sources. The following measurements have been carried out:-
· Existing noise levels in proposed residential areas to enable a PPG 24 (planning and noise) assessment.
· Road traffic noise measurements of roads in and around the proposed site
· Measurements of industrial noise sources
· Measurements at noise-sensitive receptors (residential and commercial)
· Tram noise measurements
· Bus Rapid Transit systems at various locations around the country.
6. LAND USES
6.1 Office Opportunities
6.1.1 The River Don District Masterplan will deliver a new mixed-use quarter for Sheffield designed to attract a range of occupiers, in particular national mobile and international inward investment which the city is currently losing to competing centres. It will complement Sheffield’s existing office environment by differentiating supply and widening choice and availability from the city centre offer, defining a clearer hierarchy of provision and expanding its portfolio of products. This complimentary role with the City Centre will be clearly demonstrated by a market analysis and assessment, to ensure that a competitive situation between the two centres in the City is not created.
6.1.2 A total of 120,000m2 is proposed in three phases. These three phases will take place over a 20-year timescale, which will ensure compatibility with the regeneration of the City Centre.
6.2 Residential Opportunities
6.2.1 The River Don District presents a significant opportunity for the delivery of a new higher-density urban quarter with significant levels of new residents.
6.2.2 A new residential market for Sheffield will be built around:
· re-use of previously developed land;
· investment in new transport infrastructure;
· new community amenities;
· complementarity to Sheffield’s Housing Market Renewal Programme by providing a different type of residential development and bringing new amenities and public realm investment to the community;
· immediate proximity to existing Meadowhall facilities; and
· significant potential provision for new employment opportunities for existing and new communities.
6.2.3 A total of 1,300 housing units are proposed over three phases.
6.3 Leisure, Community & Supporting Retail
6.3.1 Delivering sustainable growth of a new working and living environment will require a mix of uses to create a vibrant and safe environment and attract and retain residents and businesses.
6.3.2 The provision of leisure, community and supporting retail uses across the Masterplan is necessary to meet the additional needs of existing and new communities, add to overall attraction as a business location and provide local employment opportunities. These new uses will also be critical for the successful re-branding of the area as a desirable and viable residential and high value employment destination.
6.3.3 A total of 7,500m2 of leisure (D2) and 7,500m2 of retailing (A1/A3) is proposed.
6.4 Car Showrooms
6.4.1 The masterplan includes 4 car showrooms on phase 1 of the Masterplan development. Planning permission was granted for this part of the scheme on 21 August 2007.
6.5. Open Space
6.5.1 To make the area a more desirable address for living, working and recreating, an important focus of the Masterplan has been on providing a comprehensive park and open space framework for the entire area. This significant open space contribution has been linked into the wider open space network as well as the existing river and canal systems.
6.5.2 The open space provision of the River Don District comprises a hierarchy of green spaces that have been introduced to act as a vital source for activity, recreation and amenity for new residents and workers as well creating different types of settings for different types of occupiers and users:
· Large informal open spaces as community amenity, riverside park area and a comprehensive solution to flooding. Serving this function is the River Don District’s primary open space, River Don Park.
· Smaller community park spaces within the heart of the plan providing local amenity and green space.
· Hard surfaced public squares at key junctions to act as the main gathering areas and addresses for the highest quality, highest intensity development.
· Green connections to and through the Masterplan, including connections east-west to the communities of Brightside. New green connections are also provided along the length of the River Don.
· In addition to providing new amenity, these green spaces create a more positive image for the area, resolve on-going environmental issues, safeguard ecological habitat, and create new addresses for quality investment.
7. Costs
7.1 The implementation of the British Land parts of the Masterplan has an estimated construction cost of £300m for floorspace and related site preparation, infrastructure and public realm. There will be a need for some public sector contribution.
8. COMMENTS ON THE MASTERPLAN
8.1 Overall Points
8.1.1 The Masterplan key thesis is to provide a mixed use sustainable development which is welcomed. It indicates that 120,000m2 of new office space and 1,300 housing units are proposed. However, because insufficient site density information has been provided at this stage there is no comment on whether the area can actually satisfactorily accommodate this amount of development. The developer is intending to provide this level of detail at the next stage. The developer will also address any comments that form part of this report in the subsequent more detailed plans that are in preparation.
8.1.2 Taking the main activities in turn:
8.2 Business
8.2.1 In general, office development in this area is supported, as it would take advantage of the locational benefits given by Meadowhall Centre and the transport connections there. However, the quantity of office development is subject to the development plan considerations itemised below.
8.2.2 The Unitary Development Plan (UDP) allocates the area to the south west of the embankment as a Fringe Industry and Business Area where Business B1 is a preferred use. The land to the north of the embankment is covered by Policy S8 – Development at Meadowhall.
8.2.3 Since the UDP was adopted, a revised PPS 6 – Planning for Town Centres, was published in 2005. This requires that consideration for town centre proposals, including offices, should take into account the need for the development; that it is of an appropriate scale; there are no more central sites for the development; there are no unacceptable impacts on existing centres and that locations are accessible. Offices in this location can, subject to demonstrating compliance with the above criteria, be acceptable.
8.2.4 The Submission Version of the Sheffield Development Framework (SDF) Core Strategy (approved by Cabinet 11 July 2007) in Policy SB3 indicates that the area around Meadowhall is an acceptable location for offices but that development in the City Centre and at its edge should include at least 65% of total office development in the city.
8.2.5 The SDF Preferred Options for City Policies and Proposals Map (approved by Cabinet 11 April 2007 for public consultation) identifies the Weedon Street, Sheffield Road frontage and car parks to the south west of Meadowhall Centre as a Business Area (Policy PB2) where offices are preferred and that at least 50% of the gross floor space in the area should be offices.
8.2.6 In terms of the existing UDP the offices proposals are acceptable (subject also to PPS6 that has superseded elements of the UDP as described above). In terms of the emerging SDF, the office proposals are consistent with the policies. They would also be consistent with PPS 6 subject to satisfying the relevant criteria.
8.3 Retail
8.3.1 New retail development in this area should be strictly limited because of the key City and national policies containing the amount of retail in regional shopping centres. In particular the development of the New Retail Quarter must not be adversely affected by increased retail floorspace at Meadowhall. Some new retail development could be justified but this would be of limited amount to serve the needs of new residents and workpeople.
8.3.2 The UDP allocates the whole of the area within the former railway embankment, Sheffield Road the M1 and the river as a Regional Centre in Policy S8 where shops are acceptable subject to other policy considerations regarding the city centre and district centres.
8.3.3 The UDP has, however, been overtaken by the Draft Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) and PPS 6. The Draft RSS states that there should be no large scale expansion at regional centres such as Meadowhall. If the Government accepts the RSS Panel’s recommendations, the policy would read “No further development or expansion of out-of-centre shopping centres should be permitted.” The Secretary of State is expected to publish in September 2007 the final version of the RSS for public consultation. It will be within this context that retail issues will be resolved. PPS 6 states that “Proposals to renew or replace existing facilities in out-of-centre regional centres, where this would involve neither additional floorspace nor additional car parking facilities, may, however, be appropriate subject to the appropriate policy considerations.
8.3.4 The Submission Version of the SDF Core Strategy states in Policy SS1 that “Meadowhall Shopping Centre will remain at around its present size and major non-food retail development will not occur outside the Core Retail Area and District Centres and their edges” The term ‘around its present size relates to the possibility of minor non-retail development. This is further detailed in the Preferred Options for City Policies which states in PS4, “ Minor development will consist of refurbishment and redevelopment and will not be permitted if it would lead to a net increase in gross retail floorspace.” Retail development is regarded as A1 uses only and minor non-retail eg A2 to A5 (public offices and food outlets), D2 (leisure), B1a (offices) and C1 (housing) uses may be acceptable. Preferred Option PS4 does not impose specific floorspace limits on these uses.
8.3.5 There is no case for the amount of A1 retail development proposed. Any new retailing can only be supported if it is demonstrated that it is to meet the needs of the new residential community. Non A1 developments such as food and drink would be acceptable, as would the re-configuration of parts of the Meadowhall Centre to produce a different retail offer.
8.4 Housing
8.4.1 Some housing in principle is acceptable subject to meeting important sustainable development criteria. An important issue is that there are a sufficient number of units that a viable community can be created. A figure in the order of 1000 to 1500 is likely to be needed. If the number is significantly below 1000 there is the danger of creating an isolated community and this would, in practice, be difficult for the developer to sell.
8.4.2 The UDP shows the area to the southwest of the embankment as a FIBA (IB6) where housing is acceptable subject to a number of policy considerations. The area to the northeast of the embankment is covered by Policy S8 where housing is an unacceptable use. The current Masterplan proposals do not propose any housing here but the Proposals Map does as part of a Business Area.
8.4.3 Policy SH1 of the Submission Version of the SDF Core Strategy allows for some housing development in this area within the overall housing supply figures. However, this policy has only assumed a number in the order of 750 dwellings even though this would not meet the 1000 to 1500 dwelling number referred to above. This represents the likely number of units that would result from the Business Area designation requirement for 50% of the gross floorspace to be offices. Assuming a density of 80 dwellings per hectare, which would be the maximum level consistent with City Policies preferred option PH10, this would provide around 750 units. City Policies Preferred Option PH4, as part of creating mixed communities, proposes that on housing sites of more than 60 units (except in the City Centre) at least half the new homes should be family housing. This affects the overall housing density that could be accommodated in this area. The total housing figure could be raised by increasing the office density thereby releasing more land for housing or encroaching onto the Meadowhall car parks thus increasing the total amount of land available for both offices and housing.
8.4.4 Core Strategy Policy SH6 requires developers of medium and large sites to provide affordable housing. As this area falls within a Housing Market Renewal Area, Policy PH5 in the Preferred Options for City Policies states that equivalent to at least 15% of the units should be affordable.
8.4.5 The RSS EiP Panel Report is reflected in the Core Strategy Policy SH1.
8.4.6 The phasing and timing of housing is important to ensure that the surrounding HMR areas are developed for housing as a priority.
8.4.7 Housing is an acceptable component in the mix of uses proposed. However, the issue will be over the amount, phasing and timing of housing to create a viable sustainable community, achieve a balance between apartments and family housing and ensure priority for HMR areas.
8.5 Transport
8.5.1 The developer is continuing to work with Council officers to produce an acceptable transport solution for the Masterplan area. A key consideration is gaining the agreement of the Highways Agency as this location has a major impact on the M1 and junction 34 in particular.
8.5.2 Support for the Masterplan must remain conditional upon a satisfactory solution to the transport issues being agreed. To achieve this level of development will require a mix of measures that is likely to include a fixed road link from Meadowhall Way to Sheffield (the former Halfpenny Link), improved public transport that could include the proposed Bus Rapid Transit, improved pedestrian and cycling facilities and strict controls on car parking and travel plans.
8.6 Flood Alleviation
8.6.1 The developers have provided a flood alleviation report. However, this was before the major flooding that occurred on 25 June 2007 where there was flood event that appears to be considerably in excess of the 1 in 100 year prediction. They will need to revisit the alleviation measures in light of that experience.
8.6.2 The City Council has undertaken a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) for the whole of the City. This was written in August 2006 in the context of PPS 25: Development and Flood Risk, which was at the consultation stage at that time. The SFRA included the Gateway area within two Character Areas: S04 – Lower Don (West) and S05 – Meadowhall. The latter covers the River Don District.
8.6.3 The broad conclusion of the SRFA for these two character areas was that although there was a high degree of uncertainty in the Environment Agency (EA) Flood Zone Map, by taking the precautionary principle, large proportions of the two areas are situated in “Flood Zone 3a – High
Risk”. In the area of high risk, the land use should be restricted to the ‘less vulnerable’ category as defined in PPS 25. If a ‘more vulnerable’ land use was proposed (e.g. residential) the requirements of the Exception Test must be satisfied.
8.6.4 As a result of the recent flooding experience the flood alleviation proposals will need to be reviewed. It is likely that wider ranging measures will need to be developed requiring significant public funding support.
8.7 Open Space/Ecology
8.7.1 The Masterplan proposes a series of quality open spaces that are welcomed. A particular concern is the former railway embankment that has been designated as a Site for Nature Conservation (SINC) because it has an urban common environment. The Masterplan envisages the majority of the embankment remaining but there will need to be carefully scrutiny of the details of specific development proposals to ensure that the SINC does not lose its important character.
8.7.2 The details of development adjacent to the embankment will need careful scrutiny to ensure that the ecological character is not destroyed. The wider open space proposals are welcomed.
8.8.Urban Design
8.8.1 The masterplan identifies the need for a strong identity for the area, and successfully outlines a very strong vision, ‘ from grey to green’, which is strongly supported. The masterplan vision clearly identifies the constraints and opportunities in the area. It does set out clear principles to deliver the vision.
8.8.2 The proposition for a mixed use district is welcomed, and strongly supports the aspiration towards achieving excellence in design for new build. The proposed green network, which creates permeability as well as quality public amenity, in the masterplan area should sensitively and imaginatively integrate the local features like the River Don, the disused railway embankment etc.
8.8.3 Major points to be developed are:
· Sustainability and Design Quality
· Image and identity
· Legibility
· Character and distinctiveness
8.9 Costs
8.9.1 The Masterplan does not specify how much public sector financial support is likely to be needed. However, because some of the likely transport solutions will benefit the whole of the Lower Don Valley some grant assistance would be expected to be required to cover transport infrastructure improvements such as the fixed link and flood alleviation measures.
8.9.2 Public funding is likely to be required with sources to include Sub –Regional Investment Plan (SRIP), English Partnerships and European Structural Funds Programme (the follow on to Objective One).
8.10 Consultation
8.10.1 There has been extensive discussions with Council officers on the Lower Don Valley over a number of years. Presentations have been made to the Area Panel and to the East End Strategy Group. There has not however been specific consultation on the final document. It is not intended to do so, as the principle proposals will be incorporated into the emerging Local Development Framework which will be subject to formal public consultation. The subsequent planning applications will go through the normal consultation route.
8.10.2 The subsequent planning applications will be the route by which there will be extensive public consultation.
9. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
9.1 There are no direct financial implications as part of this report. Any proposals that subsequently emerge, as indicated in 8.9 above, that require funding will be the subject of separate reports.
10. EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES
10.1There are no equality issues arising directly from this report.
10.2 Any equality issues will be addressed as part of the subsequent planning applications.
11. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
11.1 There are no sustainability implications arising directly from this report. However, at the subsequent detailed stage likely sustainability issues will then be considered.
12. COMMUNITY SAFETY
12.1 There are no implications for community safety arising directly from this report. Health and safety issues would be considered bas part of the detailed proposals for the area.
13. HUMAN RIGHTS
13.1 There are implications for human rights arising directly from this report.
14. CONCLUSIONS
14.1 The proposals by British Land for the regeneration of this important part of the Lower Don Valley are welcomed.
14.2 There are detailed issues especially regarding the amount and phasing of offices and housing that will need to be resolved as part of the subsequent detailed proposals for the area.
14.3 The amount of retail development will need to be severely limited to accord with local, regional and national planning policies.
15. RECOMMENDATIONS
15.1 The Cabinet are requested to:
15.1.1 To note progress on the River Don District Masterplan produced by Urban Strategies Inc. of Canada (USI) for British Land.
15.1.2 To seek the Cabinet’s endorsement in principle of the Masterplan proposals taking into account the comments contained in this report and to identify areas for further work and future public consultation.
David Curtis
Director of Development Services
Downloads
How useful is this page?