Objection to the inclusion of site SES03 in Sheffield's Draft Local Plan
Introduction
The proposed inclusion of site SES03 in Sheffield's local plan has been met with objection from local residents and local councillors.
There are several factors that contribute to this opposition:
- The lack of immediate need for additional industrial space in the area.
- Uncertainty around how usable the site is.
- Its proximity to residential areas.
- Potential environmental impacts.
- Increased traffic congestion on Eckington Way.
- Inconsistency with national policy guidelines.
Below, we explore some of the reasons Sheffield City Council should exclude site SES03 from the Local Plan because it lacks effectiveness, justification, and consistency with national policy.
Effectiveness
The proposal to use site SES03 as an industrial and Gypsy & Traveller site falls at the first hurdle as it will be ineffective at providing its proposed uses.
The presence of a high-pressure gas pipe on the site highlights its unwarranted nature as an industrial site. The presence of a gas pipe of this magnitude poses significant safety risks and calls into question the feasibility of building on this location.
Additionally, Sheffield City Council's site appraisal states that agricultural land surveys are required to determine the land's classification, which raises the risk of the site being protected as a Grade 3a farming land and potentially leading to the failure of the proposal at a later date, putting Sheffield City Council in noncompliance with its legal obligation to provide Gypsy and Traveller accommodation. The Sheffield Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (2019) also indicates a preference for a brownfield site, further emphasising the unsuitability of the proposed location.
The presence of the high-pressure gas pipe, along with the other aforementioned factors, makes it clear that this site is not an effective solution for providing an industrial development or accommodation for the Gypsy and Traveller community in Sheffield. It is not recommended to pursue this proposal due to the various challenges it presents and the uncertain and potentially harmful consequences it may bring.
Justification
The proposed Industrial site in Sheffield lacks support from local occupancy rates and presents several challenges that make it an unjustified location for development. Firstly, the current capacity of nearby commercial premises meets demand, indicating that there is no immediate need for additional space in the area. Secondly, its proximity to residential areas may hinder its ability to attract new tenants due to potential noise disturbances and heavy traffic.
Moreover, the development of the green field site, which is located between a busy road and an existing residential estate, would have adverse environmental impacts. The construction process would entail clearing vegetation and disrupting wildlife habitats, while the increased traffic would result in increased air pollution in a densely populated area, potentially posing significant health risks for local residents. Changes to land drainage or water runoff could also result in flooding for neighbouring properties and put additional pressure on local water resources.
The only access point for the site is Eckington Way, which is already congested due to its proximity to Crystal Peaks Shopping Centre and Drakehouse Retail Park. The congestion has led to a significant number of collisions on Eckington Way and the north roundabout over the past 5 years, with 5 serious collisions and 8 slight collisions recorded.
Considering these factors, the proposed development of this site is unjustified. There are other employment sites within the South East of Sheffield with better access and infrastructure that require investment and would not result in the loss of green space. The draft site allocation list presents several preferred alternatives, and proceeding with this site without publicly considering these options is unjustified.
Consistency with national policy
The proposed Industrial and Gypsy & Traveller site is inconsistent with national policy.
Sheffield City Council's own site appraisal highlights that the proposed site already is or is close to exceeding air quality levels. Sheffield City Council has a legal obligation to improve air quality. In fact, the council is already implementing a Clean Air Zone in the City Centre to improve air quality, yet this proposed development would result in an increase of traffic in an area that already has air quality concerns.
Moreover, the Department for Communities and Local Government's Planning policy for traveller sites states that proper consideration should be given to the local environment such as noise and air quality for the health and well-being of all travellers as well as existing residents.
The same planning policy also asks that planner do not place undue pressure on local infrastructure. As this objection has already discussed, there is already issues with traffic and congestion in the area.
There is not sufficient evidence that the duty to cooperate has been sufficiently followed. The Planning Policy for Traveller Sites states that Local Planning Authorities should ‘consider production of joint development plans that set targets on a cross-authority basis, to provide more flexibility in identifying sites’.
The Local Plan states that authorities within South Yorkshire (Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham and Sheffield) have identified strategic cross boundary issues, including Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople, and have agreed to produce a series of ‘Statements of Common Ground’ covering these issues.
However, these have not yet been produced at the point of site SES 03 being proposed for use by travelling showpeople. If they had been, it is likely that the findings from 2019 Sheffield Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment would have been taken into account. This states that:-
“Doncaster has the largest provision for Travelling Showpeople in the region with nine sites accommodating 72 yards. Their GTAA suggested that this is an oversupply. Bolsover also has a Showpeople site with a further two sites granted planning permission in the area, these sites can accommodate a total of 22 yards. It is unclear if Showpeople from Sheffield would be interested in living on these sites”.
Doncaster is indicated to have a five-year surplus of 16 gypsy and traveller pitches overall.
While it is true that the GTAA shows a need for further traveller accommodation in Sheffield, in moving forwards with this allocation without having produced the statement of common ground from the South Yorkshire local authorities, there is a significant risk of creating a large surplus of travelling showpeople sites across the South Yorkshire region altogether.
Finally, the same planning policy published by the Department for Communities and Local Government also says that particular attention should be given to early and effective community engagement with both settled and traveller communities. It's open to debate what actually constitutes "early and effective community engagement" but, opening this draft plan for consultation on the 9th January 2023 and closing it on the 20th February doesn't scream openness. The sheer scale of local residents seeking information about the draft plan is a great illustration that public engagement certainly has not been effective.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the proposed use of site SES03 as an Industrial and Gypsy & Traveller site would not be effective as it is unknown if this site is even usable. It is not justified due to its proximity to residential areas, potential environmental impacts on wildlife habitats and water resources as well as increased air pollution. And it does not align with national policy guidelines which raises further concerns about its implementation.
Therefore, we recommend that the council take into consideration all the issues raised here and remove site SES03 from Sheffield’s Draft Local Plan.
Councillor Bob McCann Councillor Ann Woolhouse Councillor Kurtis Crossland
Beighton ward councillors
Councillor Kevin Oxley Councillor Gail Smith
Mosborough ward councillors