Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Sheffield Development Framework

VIEWS: 16 PAGES: 160

									         Transformation and Sustainability




          SHEFFIELD DEVELOPMENT
               FRAMEWORK




 CORE STRATEGY SUBMISSION VERSION

          CITY CENTRE
    AREA BACKGROUND REPORT




Development Services
Sheffield City Council
Howden House
1 Union Street
SHEFFIELD
S1 2SH                             September 2007
                                                 CONTENTS
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1
    The Context ........................................................................................................ 1
    The Emerging Options ........................................................................................ 1
    The Preferred Options ........................................................................................ 1
    Additional Options ............................................................................................... 2
    Submission Version ............................................................................................ 2
    The Scope of this Report .................................................................................... 2
    Introduction to the Issues .................................................................................... 3
2 CITY CENTRE QUARTERS .............................................................................. 19
    Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) ............................................................ 21
    Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)............................................. 22
    Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................... 22
    Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) .......................................................... 23
    Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ..................................... 24
    Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ......................................... 26
    Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)........................................ 27
    Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 28
3. OFFICES IN THE CITY CENTRE ...................................................................... 29
    Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) ............................................................ 30
    Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)............................................. 32
    Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................... 32
    Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) .......................................................... 33
    Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ..................................... 34
    Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ......................................... 38
    Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)........................................ 39
4 SHOPPING IN THE CITY CENTRE .................................................................. 41
    Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) ............................................................ 42
    Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)............................................. 44
    Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................... 45
    Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) .......................................................... 45
    Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ..................................... 47
    Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ......................................... 53
    Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)........................................ 53
5 CULTURAL FACILITIES IN THE CITY CENTRE .............................................. 55
    Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) ............................................................ 55
    Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)............................................. 58
    Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................... 59
    Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) .......................................................... 60
    Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ..................................... 60
    Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ......................................... 62
    Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)........................................ 63
6 THE UNIVERSITIES .......................................................................................... 65
    Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) ............................................................ 65
    Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)............................................. 68
    Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................... 68
    Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) .......................................................... 69
    Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ..................................... 70
    Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ......................................... 72
     Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)........................................ 73
7    HOUSING IN THE CITY CENTRE .................................................................... 75
     Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) ............................................................ 76
     Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)............................................. 78
     Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................... 78
     Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) .......................................................... 79
     Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ..................................... 81
     Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ......................................... 87
     Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)........................................ 87
8    MANUFACTURING AND THE CITY CENTRE – TRANSITION AREAS ........... 89
     Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) ............................................................ 90
     Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)............................................. 91
     Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................... 91
     Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) .......................................................... 91
     Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ..................................... 93
     Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ......................................... 96
     Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)........................................ 97
9    TALL BUILDINGS IN THE CITY CENTRE ........................................................ 99
     Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) ............................................................ 99
     Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)........................................... 101
     Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................. 101
     Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) ........................................................ 102
     Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ................................... 104
     Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ....................................... 107
     Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)...................................... 107
10   TRANSPORT IN THE CITY CENTRE ............................................................. 109
     Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) .......................................................... 110
     Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)........................................... 113
     Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................. 113
     Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) ........................................................ 114
     Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ................................... 115
     Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ....................................... 118
     Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)...................................... 118
11   PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT IN THE CITY CENTRE ................................. 121
     Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) .......................................................... 121
     Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)........................................... 123
     Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................. 123
     Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) ........................................................ 124
     Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ................................... 124
     Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ....................................... 126
     Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)...................................... 127
12   OPEN SPACE AND RIVERSIDES IN THE CITY CENTRE ............................. 129
     Policy Background (Soundness Test 4) .......................................................... 130
     Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)........................................... 131
     Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test 6) ................. 132
     Options Considered (Soundness Test 7) ........................................................ 133
     Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7) ................................... 134
     Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8) ....................................... 137
     Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)...................................... 138
13   OTHER RELEVANT STRATEGY DOCUMENTS ............................................ 139
     The City Centre Masterplan ............................................................................ 139
    City Centre Living Strategy Supplementary Planning Guidance ..................... 140
    Night-Time Uses – Draft Interim Planning Guidance ...................................... 140
    Planning for Town Centres: Guidance on Design and Implementation Tools
   (2005) .............................................................................................................. 140
    The Urban Design Compendium (September 2004) ....................................... 140
    Cathedral Quarter Action Plan (2005) ............................................................. 141
    CIQ Action Plan (1999) ................................................................................... 141
    Sheaf Valley Masterplan (2006) ...................................................................... 141
    The Moor Design and Development Framework (2004) ................................. 141
    The Devonshire Quarter Action Plan (2000) ................................................... 141
    St Vincent’s Action Plan (2004)....................................................................... 142
    Castlegate Masterplan (2005) ......................................................................... 142
    Kelham Island and Neepsend Action Plan (in preparation) ............................. 144
    West Bar Interim Planning Guidance (IPG) (July 2006) .................................. 144
    Wicker Riverside Action Plan (Expected 2007) ............................................... 144
APPENDIX 1 – DELIVERY SCHEDULES .............................................................. 145
APPENDIX 2 – CONNECTIONS WITH NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY AND THE
    REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY ................................................................. 153


                                                 List of Tables
Table 1 – Office Developments of at least 1,000 square metres Completed in
    Sheffield City Centre in 2006 & 2007 .................................................................. 5
Table 2 – Office Developments of at least 1,000 square metres Under Construction in
    Sheffield City Centre, July 2007 .......................................................................... 6
Table 3 – Sheffield City Centre Quarters and Related Area Documents .................. 10
Table 4 – Hierarchy of City Centre Retail Locations and Appropriate Development . 49
Table 5 – Major Development Schemes Undertaken by Sheffield Hallam University
    and the University of Sheffield in Sheffield City Centre, 1993 to 2007 .............. 70
Table 6 – Buildings of 10 or more Storeys Proposed or Under Construction in
    Sheffield, July 2007 ......................................................................................... 103
1.     INTRODUCTION
       The Context

1.1    This report provides background information and evidence to support the
       Preferred Options for the Core Strategy of the Sheffield Development
       Framework.

1.2    The Sheffield Development Framework is Sheffield’s Local Development
       Framework, which the local planning authority is now required to produce. It
       will contain all of the City’s planning policies and proposals and will replace the
       outgoing Unitary Development Plan. Further information about the Sheffield
       Development Framework can be found in the project programme, known as
       the Local Development Scheme1.

1.3    The Core Strategy is the first of the development plan documents in the
       Framework. It sets out the overall planning aims and objectives and
       establishes the broad spatial framework for all the other documents.

1.4    The Core Strategy has been prepared in several stages, based on periods of
       consultation. These stages were about:

              Emerging Options
              Preferred Options
              Additional Options (for a few issues only)
              Submission, for final representations and public examination.

       The Emerging Options
1.5    The Emerging Options were the broad choices for the Core Strategy and they
       were set out in a separate document2. They were drawn up to enable the
       Council to consider and consult on all the possibilities early in the process of
       drawing up the Strategy. The City Council consulted on these options and
       then decided which to take forward as Preferred Options. The other options
       have been rejected but this document sets out how they were taken into
       account and why the Council is proposing the Preferred Options instead.

       The Preferred Options
1.6    The Preferred Options were published3 and consulted on as the ones that the
       Council was minded to take forward to submission. However, the choice of
       option and the way it was expressed remained subject to public comment.
       The Preferred Options document outlined how the Council had arrived at them
       and the justification for choosing them. It also indicated which Emerging

1
  Sheffield Development Framework: The Local Development Scheme. Sheffield City Council (revised
October 2006). SDF Local Development Scheme 2006
2
  Sheffield Development Framework: Emerging Options for the Core Strategy. (Sheffield City Council,
May 2005). SDF Core Strategy Emerging Options 2005.
3
  Sheffield Development Framework: Preferred Options for the Core Strategy. Sheffield City Council,
(May 2005). SDF Core Strategy Preferred Options 2006

                                                 1
       Options had been rejected. In most cases these Preferred Options were
       taken forward as policies in the draft submitted Core Strategy4.

       Additional Options
1.7    Further work indicated that there were a few issues to be covered that had not
       featured in the earlier options consultations and there were some issues that
       had been considered where a new option needed to be considered. These
       were set out in the Additional Options Report 5 and consulted on.

       Submission Version
1.8    Much of the Submission Version follows the approach proposed in the
       Preferred and Additional Options and takes account of comments made about
       those documents. However, the opportunity remains in the final period for
       representations to draw attention to any outstanding matters that it is still
       considered would make the submitted document unsound. The soundness of
       the document will be decided by a Planning Inspector through a process of
       public examination.

1.9    The Background Reports set out the Council’s evidence for considering that
       the Core Strategy is sound. They are prepared specifically to help consultees
       and the Inspector come to a view about the Council’s position. The Core
       Strategy itself has space only to summarise the reasons for the chosen
       policies. So, the more detailed background information and analysis there is
       all found in the Background Reports.

1.10   The Background Reports are not actually part of the Sheffield Development
       Framework but they clearly contribute to the statutory process of preparing it.
       The regulations refer to ‘DPD [Development Plan Document] documents’ and
       these may include:

           “such supporting documents as in the opinion of the authority are relevant
           to the preparation of the DPD”6

1.11   The Background Reports all fall within this definition. The versions of the
       Background Reports supporting the submitted Core Strategy have been made
       available for inspection with the Core Strategy.

       The Scope of this Report
1.12   This report supports the submitted policies covering Sheffield’s City Centre.
       The chapters are based on each of the issues covered in the chapter on the
       City Centre in the Core Strategy document and they deal with each of the


4
  Sheffield Development Framework: Core Strategy – Draft for submission to the Secretary of State.
Sheffield City Council (September 2007)
5
 Sheffield Development Framework: Core Strategy – Additional Options. Sheffield City Council
(February 2007) SDF Core Strategy Additional Options 2007
6
  The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004, Regulation 24(4)

                                                2
       soundness tests in turn. A final chapter deals with issues not followed through
       to the submitted Core Strategy.

1.13   The intention was to consider possibilities in a way that takes account of the
       wishes of communities and other stakeholders, and that is appraised for
       sustainability. In some cases, options were taken forward to become policies.
       Other options were discarded, but the next four chapters describe how they
       have been taken into account and why the Council has rejected them. In
       some cases the preferred option and subsequent policy is a combination of
       the earlier emerging options.

1.14   Stakeholders have been involved extensively through all stages. Their
       comments have been recorded as part of the statutory consultation process,
       and where relevant, their comments are referred to in the chapters.
       Stakeholders included Sheffield One, the urban regeneration company that is
       now part of Creative Sheffield.

       Introduction to the Issues
1.15   The following section provides the context for the policies and gives a brief
       introduction to the overall scope of the policies, what they include and what
       they omit and why. It is a general introduction to the wider policy influences
       on the Core Strategy policies, and supports the argument that the policies are
       generally sound.

1.16   The City Centre is recognised as a key economic driver for the City and the
       City Region, and the Core Strategy policies seek to promote this. It is defined
       as the area within the Inner Relief Road together with the Kelham/ Neepsend
       area (as shown on the Key Diagram).

1.17   The policies have been extensively informed by area action plans and the City
       Centre Masterplan (2000, reviewed 2007), which are needed to deliver the
       vision for the City Centre. Predominant forms of City Centre development are
       offices, shops, cultural and leisure facilities, the universities and housing, and
       the policies reflect this.

       Definition of the City Centre

1.18   The City Centre forms part of the City Centre-Nether Edge Panel Area. This
       panel area also covers the neighbourhoods of Sharrow, Highfield, Broomhall,
       Broomhill, Nether Edge, Brincliffe, Endcliffe and parts of Heeley. However,
       this Area Background Report covers just the City Centre because of the
       strategic importance and complexity of the City Centre, and its distinct and
       unique character.

1.19   For the purposes of this Background Report and strategies and policies in the
       Sheffield Development Framework, the area of the City Centre is considered
       to be the area within the existing Inner Ring Road to the west and south
       (Hoyle Street, Netherthorpe Road, Hanover Street, Hanover Way, St Mary’s
       Gate and St Mary’s Road), the railway line serving Midland Station, Park
       Square and the Parkway to the east, the railway line that runs over the Wicker

                                            3
       arches to the north and Rutland Road / Penistone Road to the north west.
       This area is virtually the same as the Central Area (Area 10) in the Unitary
       Development Plan, and the boundary is shown in detail on the Sheffield
       Development Framework Preferred Options Proposals Map.7

       History

1.20   Sheffield City Centre has grown gradually but sporadically over the centuries.
       The rivers were the initial focus of development in medieval times, but the city
       grew significantly during the Industrial Revolution. Much of the old street
       patterns have been retained but few of the older buildings remain as a result
       of clearance. Different areas of the City Centre have developed different
       primary functions over the years. The old markets area has retained its retail
       function, though this is currently in decline, whilst other retail areas have
       grown up around main routes such as Fargate and The Moor. Industrial areas
       that developed alongside houses on small sites have remained in these areas,
       despite the nature of their operations changing and their sites becoming less
       appropriate for modern manufacturing. The City Centre has always had an
       important role as a leisure destination and attractions have become well
       established. Sheffield City Centre, therefore, has developed an important role
       in the three major sectors of employment, shopping and leisure. In the very
       recent past it has also developed a strong residential function.

       Economy

1.21   The City Centre, with its wide range of sectors, is closely involved with the
       city’s overall economy. Gross Domestic Product per head of population in
       Sheffield has increased more than in most of the other 7 core cities
       (Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle and
       Nottingham) since 1996. But average weekly earnings have decreased and
       are significantly below average for core cities.

1.22   Employment is now concentrated in the distribution, hotels and restaurants
       and public services sectors of the economy - Sheffield having changed from
       being a primarily manufacturing employer to a mainly service employer. There
       has been an increase in employment in growth sectors such as banking and
       finance since 1997, although this is not as big as witnessed in the core cities
       as a whole and the absolute number of firms is relatively small.

1.23   Sheffield appears to be becoming a more attractive location for investment
       with a steady increase in the number of enquiries for investment opportunities
       received by Creative Sheffield, the organisation that deals with inward
       investment enquiries for the city.

1.24   This increasing demand is being translated into an increase in office
       development schemes in the City Centre, after several years of inactivity. The
       new offices built in 2005 at Riverside Exchange by Wilson Bowden, occupied
       by Irwin Mitchell, were the first major new offices completed since 2001 in the
       City Centre. This renaissance in City Centre office development has
7
 Sheffield City Council, Sheffield Development Framework Emerging Proposals Map, Area 8, or
http://sheffield.leadpartners.co.uk/pdf/map8.pdf

                                               4
       continued through 2006 and into 2007, with three significant schemes
       completed in 2006 and four schemes already completed, as detailed in Table
       1 below. Two more schemes are expected to be completed in 2007, as
       detailed in Table 2 below.

       Table 1 – Office Developments of at least 1,000 square metres
       Completed in Sheffield City Centre in 2006 & 2007
                                               Date       Value       Office  Estimated
                                             Completed    (£m)     Floorspace    jobs
                                                                     (sq.m.)
        Heart Of the City - New Offices        March        24        8,800      500
        - 1, St Paul's Place                   2006
        ‘Metis’ Former Parkwood              June 2006       4        2,650          140
        College, Solly Street / Scotland
        Street – part of mixed, mainly
        residential scheme
        ‘V1’, Solly Street / White Croft /   November        8        3,800          200
        Tenter Street – part of Velocity       2006
        Living Housing Development
        'The Circle', Rockingham Lane         March          5        3,500          190
                                               2007
        Castlegate ('The Square') -                 8
                                             April 2007       5,000                  260
        Offices Phase 1 (Office No. 4)
        Butcher Works, 72 Arundel      May 2007     9         2,300                  150
        Street
        '1 North Bank', Central        June 2007    13        6,500                  340
        Riverside, Blonk Street /
        Wicker / Sheldon Row / Willey
        Street
        Total                                       71       32,550                 1780
       Source: Major Development Schemes database, Sheffield City Council

1.25   This improvement will continue in 2008, with at least five schemes currently
       under construction, which will deliver a significant amount of new office
       floorspace 2008. These are also shown in Table 2 below. These are clear
       signs that, after the lull in City Centre office development for 4 years, provision
       of new office floorspace is increasing dramatically to meet improving demand.

1.26   The environmental quality, particularly civic spaces and the ‘public realm’, has
       also improved dramatically in the last year or two. Improvements have
       recently been completed in the area in front of the Midland Railway Station, at
       Barker’s Pool, Howard Street, Surrey Street and in the Peace Gardens.




                                             5
        Table 2 – Office Developments of at least 1,000 square metres Under
        Construction in Sheffield City Centre, July 2007
                                              Value         Office  Estimated Expected
                                              (£m)       Floorspace    jobs   Completion
                                                           (sq.m.)
         ‘Riverside Exchange'          38                  22,150     1,000     2008
         (Former Exchange
         Brewery), Bridge Street /
         Millsands
         'Oneleven', 1-11 Arundel      9        2,000          100       November
         Gate                                                              2007
         Kelham Island -               4        1,200          130
         Corporation Street / Alma
         Street
         Former Office World Site,     15      10,500          450       Late 2008
         Furnival Square, Eyre
         Street / Furnival Street
         ‘V2' Tenter Street / Solly    8        6,200          350       December
         Street / White Croft                                              2007
         'V3', Tenter Street / Solly   3        2,000          100        Spring
         Street / White Croft                                              2008
         Castlegate ('The Square')     8        4,700          250       May 2008
         Phase 2 - Offices No. 1
         'City Gate S1', St Mary's     15       7,900          450        Autumn
         Gate / Young Street                                               2008
         Heart Of the City - Offices   20       8,300          400
         Phase 2 (No. 2 St Paul's
         Place) - Charles Street /
         Arundel Gate / Norfolk
         Street
         Heart Of the City - Offices   20      11,700          400       Early 2009
         Phase 3 (3 St. Paul's
         Place) - Charles Street /
         Arundel Gate / Norfolk
         Street
         Total                        140      76,650         3,630
        Source: Major Development Schemes in Sheffield, Sheffield City Council8

1.27    Significant transport improvements are also being delivered, with the final
        phase of the Inner Relief Road due for completion in September 2007, and
        improvements to the Midland railway station completed in 2006.

1.28    There is also significant investment in other major construction schemes in the
        City Centre. The 4-star Mercure (formerly McDonald) hotel, part of Heart of
        the City, opened in 2005 and the Leopold Hotel, operated by Prem Group, has
        just been completed in the former Education Department buildings on Leopold
        Street. Another hotel development has started on the site of the former Office

8
   Major Development Schemes in Sheffield. Sheffield City Council (July 2007)
http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/planning-and-city-development/planning-
documents/background-reports/major-development-schemes-in-sheffield

                                                 6
        World on Eyre Street. The City Hall has been refurbished and the Crucible
        Theatre is also undergoing a major refurbishment. The University of Sheffield
        have recently completed a building to house a bio-incubator laboratory and
        office block next to the Brook Hill roundabout, where a the learning resource
        centre, the Information Commons, has also just been completed. Another
        building is under construction nearby on Leavygreave Road. There is also
        major retail investment taking place with the recent redevelopment of Carmel
        House at the top of Fargate to accommodate H&M, amongst others.
        Redevelopment of the Moor, to include a new Markets building has begun with
        the clearance of several buildings. Preparation (or ‘enabling works’) for the
        £600 million New Retail Quarter (NRQ) is underway, with the scheme proper
        expecting to start in 2008 to create a new, bigger John Lewis store by 2011,
        with many more new shops to follow. In order to facilitate this, a new fire
        station is under construction on Eyre Street that will enable the existing station
        on Wellington Street to be demolished to make way for new John Lewis store.
        The City Centre’s largest open space, Devonshire Green, is also undergoing
        refurbishment.

1.29    Sheffield City Centre is a major employment centre for the wider city region. A
        workforce of over 1 million people live within one hour’s drive of the city and
        around 60,000 people work in the City Centre.

        Population

1.30    The City Centre is also becoming increasingly important as a place to live.
        The resident population within this area is rapidly growing. The City Council
        estimated, using Census of Population data,9 that 6,500 people lived in the
        City Centre in 2001. This represented a large increase on the figure for 1991,
        when approximately 1,600 residents were recorded in the Census.

1.31    In the 5 years since then, 1,705 dwellings and over 1,200 student bed spaces
        have been completed. This would put the current population at over 10,000.
        Currently there are around 5,000 committed residential units in the City
        Centre, which are either under construction, or where planning permission has
        been granted but construction has not yet begun, as well as 2,200 student bed
        spaces committed10. It is difficult to be sure about how many people this
        amount of new building will bring in, but if we assumed 1.5 persons per
        dwelling, plus another 2200 to account for student bed spaces, this would
        mean that at least 20,000 people would be living within the City Centre by
        2016. These figures illustrate how the City Centre will increase in importance
        as a centre of population in the next decade.

        Context

1.32    The City Centre has a key role in the Sheffield City Strategy11 and a vital role
        in the spatial vision for a wide range of types of development. The City Centre

9
  An Updated Baseline for Sheffield - A Final Report for Sheffield One. ECOTEC Research and
Consulting Limited (July 2002)
10
   Sheffield Housing Land Survey 2006. Sheffield City Council (2007)
11
   Sheffield City Strategy 2005-10 – Updated 2007. Sheffield First Partnership (September 2007).
www.sheffieldfirst.net/downloads/Sheffield%20City%20Strategy.pdf

                                                 7
       Masterplan12 was produced in 2001. Work is currently in hand to update this
       and a roll-forward of the City Centre Masterplan will be produced in 2007.
       SDF policies have developed alongside this work and references to relevant
       initial findings are included in this report. The City Centre Core Strategy
       policies are needed to deliver the vision for both the City Centre and the city
       as a whole. They will form the context for future Area Action Plans for areas
       within the Centre.

1.33   The emerging roll-forward of the City Centre Masterplan summarises the
       position of the City Centre at the present time as moving from arresting decline
       to starting recovery, with the next stage being transformation. This is very
       much in keeping with the transformational aims of the Core Strategy. The
       opportunities are increasing and the potential to maximise and capture these
       opportunities is greater than at any time in the recent past, but will require a
       variety of interventions in order to maximise this potential.

1.34   The City Centre Masterplan also recognise that the success of Sheffield City
       Centre is crucial to the economic performance of the whole city region, which
       is a fundamental premise on which both City Regional Development Plan and
       the emerging Economic Masterplan for Sheffield are both based.

1.35   The City Centre Masterplan identifies the need to create a critical mass of
       development, that can only be achieved by prioritising particular locations for
       the development and consolidation of business, education, shopping, culture,
       and housing, along with the creation of a diverse array of high quality shops,
       offices, universities, cultural venues, restaurants, cafes, clubs and parks, to
       give residents and workers a wider choice.

1.36   Predominant forms of City Centre development are offices, shops, cultural and
       leisure facilities, the universities and housing. Shops need to be concentrated
       in a strong single core and this is already about to be achieved through the
       redevelopment of the NRQ. Most large-scale headquarters-type offices seek
       to share prestigious locations with similar businesses and need good
       accessibility for their employees. The ‘Heart of the City’ area is already
       providing this but new locations need to be identified to enable the continued
       expansion of these sectors. Other types of business will require less
       expensive prestigious locations and less central locations are set aside for
       them.

1.37   The locational requirements for residential development are less specific but it
       is currently the most powerful player in the market for land and property.
       Provision needs to be made where it would support investment in new
       business and it should not be allowed where it would undermine the objective
       of economic transformation. It should also be in locations where the
       environment is acceptable for City Centre living needs.

1.38   The broad locations for other key uses are already well established, such as
       the two universities, which play a vital role for the economic and social life of

12
   Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Sheffield First Partnership (2001) - see
http://www.creativesheffield.co.uk/DevelopInSheffield/CityCentreMasterplan/?WBCMODE=Presentatio
nUnpublished

                                              8
        the city. Cultural facilities also form an important existing cluster centred
        around the Tudor Square area.

1.39    But extensive other areas are in a state of change as a result of strong
        demand from developers, run-down buildings that need renewal or both.
        Some of these areas already have distinctive roles to be developed. In others
        the future character reflects the best opportunities that are available to ensure
        that sustainable regeneration takes place.

1.40    Within this broad framework the 12 ‘quarters’ have been identified. The
        quarters are referred to in the draft Yorkshire and Humber Plan (the draft
        Regional Spatial Strategy, or RSS),13 on page 92.

        Needs and Opportunities - The City Centre Quarters

1.41    The City Centre is becoming more attractive to visitors of all kinds. Recent
        figures reveal that footfall in the City Centre is growing steadily. The number
        of visitors to Sheffield's most popular shopping streets in January 2006 was
        six per cent higher than the same month in 2005. Footfall counters in Fargate
        and Pinstone Street, recorded 1,240,000 pedestrian trips in January. This
        was an increase of more than 70,000 from the previous 12 months.14.

1.42    The variety of uses present and the vibrancy of the City Centre make it
        necessary to resolve tensions within the centre between competing claims.
        This is done by identifying broad areas where different uses will predominate -
        the quarters - and identifying broad priorities in different areas. This means
        that the Strategy has to ‘zoom in’ to the City Centre at a greater level of detail
        than would be appropriate for other, less intensively used, areas of the city.
        These quarters each have their own individual characteristics, and the
        Sheffield Development Framework seeks to apply different strategies for each
        of them, to capitalise on their unique character and improve the attractiveness
        and value of the City Centre as a whole. This has been the City Council’s
        approach for some time already, and this is reflected by the fact that there are
        already several Development Briefs, Action Plans, Masterplans etc., either
        published or in preparation, that cover many of these areas. Details of these
        various documents are set out later in this Report in Chapter 13.

1.43    For information, details of the identified quarters are set out below. Action
        Plans, Masterplans and other Guidance have been produced or are in
        production or for most of the quarters. These are discussed in detail in this
        chapter but are summarised in Chapter 13.




13
   The Regional Spatial Strategy – The Yorkshire and Humber Plan, Draft for Public Consultation.
Yorkshire and Humber Assembly (December 2005)
14
   http://www.yorkshire-forward.com/www/view.asp?content_id=2671&parent_id=263

                                                 9
Table 3 – Sheffield City Centre Quarters and Related Area Documents

 Quarter           Document                       Status
 1. Heart of the   Sheffield City Centre:         Adopted by the City Council
    City / NRQ     Supplementary Planning         as a material consideration.
                   Guidance For The New
                   Retail Quarter. Sheffield
                   City Council (July 2002)
 2. Cathedral      Cathedral Quarter Action       Adopted by the City Council
    Quarter        Plan 2004-2014. Sheffield      as a material consideration.
                   City Council (February
                   2005)
 3. Cultural       Cultural Industries Quarter    CIQ Plan now largely
    Industries     Action Plan - Sheffield City   delivered. SV Masterplan not
    Quarter        Council (1999), Sheaf          adopted but will be
                   Valley Masterplan - OCA        incorporated into the City
                   consultants (March 2006)       Centre Masterplan.
 4. Sheaf          Sheaf Valley Masterplan.       Not adopted but will be
    Valley         OCA consultants (March         incorporated into the City
                   2006)                          Centre Masterplan.
 5. The Moor       The Moor Design and            Endorsed by the City
                   Development Framework.         Council’s Area Planning
                   DB Real Estate                 Board as a basis for
                   (November 2004)                considering future
                                                  development proposals.
 6. Devonshire     Devonshire Quarter Action      Now largely delivered. The
    Quarter        Plan. Sheffield City           City Centre Masterplan will
                   Council (2000)                 take on the future challenges
                                                  for the area.
 7. St.            None                           The roll forward of the City
    Georges                                       Centre Masterplan will
                                                  address the issues for the
                                                  area.
 8. St.            St Vincent’s Action Plan       Adopted by the City Council
    Vincent’s      2004-2014. Sheffield City      as a material consideration.
                   Council (December 2004)
 9. Castlegate     Castlegate: Policy and         Endorsed by the City Council
                   Development Framework.         as a contribution to the City
                   Sheffield City Council /       Centre Masterplan Review
                   EDAW (October 2005).           and to the emerging SDF.
 10. Kelham /      Kelham Island and              In preparation. Anticipated
     Neepsend      Neepsend Action Plan.          completion August 2007.
                   Sheffield City Council
 11. West Bar      West Bar Interim Planning      Adopted by the City Council
                   Guidance. Sheffield City       as a material consideration.
                   Council (July 2006)
 12. Wicker /      Wicker / Riverside Action      In preparation – public
     Riverside     Plan                           consultation undertaken in
                                                  May 2007. Anticipated
                                                  completion September 2007.

                                  10
       Heart of the City, including the New Retail Quarter (NRQ)

1.44   This area is the geographical core of the City Centre, and comprises the main
       civic, arts and cultural buildings and the prime retail streets. It has been the
       focus of intensive regeneration action over the last ten years, but this
       momentum needs to be continued and, to this end, three major projects are
       designed to extend and strengthen the attractions of the area:

          The Heart of the City project itself, which has created a series of popular
           public spaces – the Peace Gardens, Winter Gardens, Millennium Gallery,
           Hallam Square and Town Hall Square. These have acted as a setting and
           stimulus for private investment, which is now well under way around the
           new Millennium and St Paul’s Squares, in partnership with CTP St James
           and City Lofts.

          The New Retail Quarter - a joint initiative between the City Council and
           Hammerson Plc to develop a retail-led scheme with approximately 80,000
           square metres of retail floorspace, including cafes, bars and restaurants
           and a new John Lewis anchor store, multi-storey car park, up to 300
           apartments, transport interchange, and extensive public realm, over an 8
           hectare prime City Centre site, at a cost of about £600 million. A planning
           application was approved by the City Council in August 2006, and there is
           Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) for the NRQ that will inform the
           development of the project.15

          The City Hall – the complete refurbishment of one of the Region’s premier
           concert halls, along with a dramatic improvement of the public realm
           setting. The City Hall re-opened and the refurbishment of Barker’s Pool
           was completed in 2006.

       Cathedral Quarter

1.45   This is one of the oldest parts of the City Centre, focussed on Sheffield's
       mediaeval Anglican cathedral and a number of good Georgian and Victorian
       buildings, streets and squares, which form part of the City Centre
       Conservation Area. Although originally a residential area it has been the city's
       professional, legal and financial district for over a century. However, in recent
       years changes in these businesses have forced some firms to seek relocation
       to modern, large floorplate buildings outside the Quarter, resulting in vacant
       properties and sites. These requirements are now being directed where
       possible to the St Vincent’s Quarter and Riverside, thus extending the
       business/professional district into former industrial areas. The Cathedral has
       completed a major expansion of its pastoral and community facilities to equip it
       for a role in the future of the City Centre.




15
  Sheffield City Centre: Supplementary Planning Guidance For The New Retail Quarter. Sheffield
City Council (July 2002) – see http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/planning-and-city-
development/planning-documents/spg

                                               11
1.46   The approved Cathedral Quarter Action Plan (2005)16 has been produced to
       guide the redevelopment. More detail of this plan is set out in paragraph
       13.12 below.

       Cultural Industries Quarter (CIQ)

1.47   The CIQ contains parts of Sheffield Hallam University’s main campus. Hallam
       University has already invested heavily in consolidating its campus in the area,
       most recently by moving its student union into the iconic HUBS Building, and
       further investment in academic facilities is taking place around Arundel Street.
       The CIQ initiative has established a key cluster in the area focussed around
       Paternoster Row and in the Conservation Area. But companies are distributed
       throughout the Quarter, mainly in former industrial buildings like Jennec and
       Workstation 1 & 2, and high quality new space such as Persistence Works.
       Further development is anticipated at the listed Stirling and Butcher Works
       (now largely completed) but there is now a need for further incubation, spin-
       out and expansion space in the Quarter, which could be met in sites such as
       the Digital Campus and Porter Brook.

1.48   Opportunities for office development are also emerging along Eyre Street
       following works to reduce severance and enhance the public realm. Over the
       last five years the area has seen a rapid expansion of housing, mainly for
       students and concentrated around Shoreham Street. But there could be
       tensions between the established nightclubs in the area and new residential
       developments.

1.49   The area remains very short of open space. The balance between the
       demands of residential and employment uses is now becoming a critical issue.
       The Midland Railway Station has been improved. Major public realm and
       traffic improvements have created a new Sheaf Square as a principle
       pedestrian arrival point for the city with a high quality route to the Heart of the
       City and Hallam University via Howard Street and Hallam Square. Vehicle
       access to the City Centre is now via Matilda Street, relieving Paternoster Row
       of through-traffic. Key public realm and open space requirements remain at
       Paternoster Row / Brown Street, Charles Street, around the Porter Brook and
       over links to the South Street / Park Hill green space. All of these issues are
       currently being reviewed by consultants on behalf of Creative Sheffield and
       Sheffield City Council in updating the City Centre Master Plan (2000) and the
       Cultural Industries Quarter (CIQ) Action Plan (1999). This will be informed by
       work on the Sheaf Valley Masterplan17, that covers both the CIQ and Sheaf
       Valley Quarters.

       Sheaf Valley

1.50   This part of the City Centre is also experiencing major change. It contains
       Sheffield Hallam University's Central Campus, the core of South Yorkshire's
       Creative and Digital Industries, the city's main railway and bus stations and a

16
   Cathedral Quarter Action Plan 2004-2014. Sheffield City Council (February 2005)
www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/planning-and-city-development/planning-documents/background-
reports/cathedral-quarter-action-plan
17
   Sheaf Valley Masterplan. OCA Consultants (March 2006)

                                              12
       number of key business development sites. Hallam University has particularly
       consolidated its campus in this area. The Quarter will complement the CIQ in
       helping to meet the need for further incubation, spin-out and expansion space
       in sites such as the Digital Campus.

1.51   The Sheaf Valley Masterplan18 has been the subject of extensive public
       consultation and has been adopted by the Sheffield One (now Creative
       Sheffield) board. It has yet to be adopted by the City Council, as it is expected
       that the principles it sets out will be taken up and incorporated into the new
       City Centre Masterplan.

       The Moor

1.52   This is a large, linear, 1950’s and 60’s retail area, with a range of shops from
       discount stores through to major department stores. In the past it has been
       perceived as a downmarket area and becomes something of a ‘ghost town’
       once the shops close, as there are virtually no residents living here. These
       issues are being addressed through a new Design and Development
       Framework19 for the area. The City Council’s Area Planning Board endorsed
       the revised Moor Development Framework as a basis for considering future
       development proposals for The Moor.

1.53   Its location, between the NRQ, the CIQ and the Devonshire Quarter, gives it a
       unique opportunity to take advantage of the ever-increasing pedestrian flows
       between these areas as they are gradually developed. It is largely under a
       single ownership (RREEF, formerly known as Deutschebank), potentially
       making any comprehensive redevelopment a lot easier.

1.54   A major project will be starting in 2007 that will see the construction of an
       indoor market, to replace the Castle and Sheaf Markets, the introduction of
       major residential uses into the area, new office development and the provision
       of a new multi-storey car park. Further redevelopment on a block-by-block
       basis is anticipated over the next decade.

       Devonshire Quarter

1.55   The Devonshire Quarter, between the Inner Ring Road, Charter Row, West
       Street, Glossop Road, Cambridge Street and Holly Street, is already a thriving,
       distinctive part of the city with independent, niche shops, restaurants and bars.
       The area contains a mix of uses including retail, light industry/business and
       residential. Devonshire Green is the major open space in the area and is
       used for events and festivals for the city and provides a focal point for the
       quarter. An improvement scheme for Devonshire Green started in the
       summer of 2007.




18
   Sheaf Valley Masterplan. OCA Consultants (March 2006)
19
   The Moor Design and Development Framework. DB Real Estate (November 2004)
http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/planning-and-city-development/planning-
documents/background-reports/the-moor-design-and-development-framework

                                              13
1.56   The Devonshire Quarter Action Plan20 was adopted in 2000. It has largely
       achieved its goals and the roll forward of the City Centre Masterplan will take
       on the future challenges for the area.

       St. Georges

1.57   The St. George’s Quarter consists of the area north and south of Leavygreave
       Road, Portobello and Trippet Lane. It includes the former St George’s Church
       and is very much dominated by the University of Sheffield. However, there are
       also retail areas on the northern side of West Street and a significant business
       area between Trippet Lane and Broad Lane.

       St. Vincent’s

1.58   This is an area at the North West of the City Centre that has suffered decades
       of slow decline and dereliction. This is especially highlighted along and
       around Upper Allen Street and elsewhere. It continues to be an active
       business and employment area, and is home to numerous important industrial
       and service companies. It also retains a residential community in and around
       Edward Street flats. The Quarter includes three Conservation Areas at
       Kelham, Well Meadow and Furnace Hill.

1.59   Due to its location on the edge of the City Centre and close to universities,
       hospitals and the legal and professional quarter, the area has become the
       focus of great development pressure in the last two or three years, especially
       from the residential market. In December 2004, the City Council adopted the
       St. Vincent’s Action Plan21. This Action Plan was produced in response to
       these development pressures and an acknowledgement by the City Council
       that the planning policy designation afforded by the Unitary Development Plan,
       which identified much of the area as a General Industry Area where heavy
       industry was preferred and housing was unacceptable, was no longer
       appropriate or helpful. The Action Plan seeks to allow for residential uses to
       develop in the area as a catalyst for regeneration, whilst still allowing the area
       to perform an important role as an important City Centre employment location.
       The Action Plan has been adopted as a material consideration when
       determining planning applications, and has also informed the production of the
       Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy, City Policies, Proposals
       Map and City Sites. Over the last year or so, the aims of the Action Plan have
       begun to be realised, and the area has undergone a significant amount of
       change. This is expected to continue over the next few years. More detail on
       the Plan is set out in paragraphs 13.17 to 13.21 below.

       Castlegate

1.60   The Castlegate Quarter is one of the oldest areas of Sheffield, the site of the
       fortress founded in the early 12th century and the main market area of the


20
  Devonshire Quarter Action Plan. Sheffield City Council (2000)
21
  St Vincent’s Action Plan 2004-2014. Sheffield City Council (December 2004) - See
www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/planning-and-city-development/planning-documents/background-
reports/sheffield-central-riverside

                                              14
       original settlement. The Quarter is seen as an important gateway to the City
       Centre from the north and east.

1.61   This area has been dominated by the Castle Market in the past and has a high
       number of buses that use Waingate and Haymarket. The markets are about
       to be relocated to The Moor, which would offer an enormous opportunity for
       redevelopment and for creating a new vision for this Quarter. It is anticipated
       that new development will focus on uncovering parts of the castle remains
       (built around 1270) and reconnecting the area to the river and down towards
       Victoria Quays.

1.62   A highly prominent site in the Castlegate area, by Park Square, is being
       developed by Carillion, to accommodate 33,500 square metres of offices, a
       multi-storey car park and a hotel.

1.63   Victoria Quays is the canal basin area that was redeveloped a number of
       years ago. The Quays consist of residential, commercial and small retail and
       leisure units. Currently the area is cut off from the rest of the City Centre to
       some extent, but with the redevelopment of the Castlegate area and the
       completion of the Inner Relief Road, connectivity will be greatly improved.

1.64   The Castlegate Masterplan (Policy and Development Framework document)
       was developed by EDAW consultants and approved at Cabinet March 200622.
       Cabinet endorsed the Castlegate Masterplan, comprising ‘The Vision’ and the
       ’Policy and Development Framework’, as the basis for guiding future
       regeneration of the Castlegate Quarter; as a contribution to the City Centre
       Masterplan Review and to the emerging Sheffield Development Framework.
       The plan provides a vision for the quarter, and will be used by the City Council
       to guide future development. It sets out the long-term vision for the area, that
       includes more commercial and leisure opportunities and less retail use.

       Kelham / Neepsend

1.65   The Kelham Island area is in a state of transition. The area remains firmly
       industrial, although many of the activities which existed in the area’s heyday
       have given way to light industry and business such as packaging, or
       information technology and office use, for example at Aizlewood’s Mill, Lion
       Works and Globe Works. However, industries that are traditional to the area
       still have a significant presence.

1.66   Residential uses have developed at Cornish Place and Brooklyn Works, and a
       further phase of residential development has recently been developed around
       Alma Street, but at present the area is not particularly welcoming, and can
       sometimes be threatening, due to anti-social behaviour. This is considered to
       be damaging to those businesses in the area that rely on attracting visitors,
       and to those business that need customers to visit their premises. The area
       also contains the city’s Industrial Museum, a major tourism asset. Although
       the museum was appropriately located in the days when heavy industry made

22
  Castlegate: Policy and Development Framework. Sheffield City Council / EDAW (October 2005).
See http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/planning-and-city-development/planning-
documents/background-reports/castlegate-masterplan

                                              15
          the area a typically ‘Sheffield’ bustling scene, the current run-down and vacant
          condition of buildings in the vicinity deters visitors and has helped account for
          relatively low attendance figures. The development of a livelier, safer
          residential area, with shops, cafes around the Alma Street and Kelham Goit
          open spaces, and a riverside walk to the City Centre, is seen as a positive
          improvement to the area that will also significantly benefit the museum.

1.67      Existing industries are important not only to the character of the area, but also
          to the wider Sheffield economy, and as such the City Council must consider
          what effort should be made to retain and nurture them in the area. However, it
          has to be recognised that heavy industrial operations falling within the
          industrial (B2) use class are incompatible with the new residential uses, so
          there will be no long-term future for industrial uses alongside or nearby. This
          does not mean that other kinds of employment in growth areas that can be
          unobtrusive neighbours cannot thrive in the cleaner, safer, restored historic
          environment.

1.68      As premises have been vacated, they have been identified by developers as
          possible sites for mainly residential redevelopment. This new influence is
          beginning to make a significant mark upon the area, and the anticipated major
          influx of students, young professionals and others will change the character of
          the area.

1.69      Work is underway to undertake a comprehensive survey of the Neepsend /
          Upper Don Area, which will identify all the businesses, residential complexes
          and other sites within the area, with a view to developing a Kelham Island and
          Neepsend Action Plan for this area.

          West Bar

1.70      From a business point of view, the West Bar quarter has a professional and
          legal focus, containing the main courts buildings, but including a large
          potential redevelopment area to the north, much of which has become ripe for
          development as a result of the provision of the final phase of the Inner Relief
          Road.

1.71      Interim Planning Guidance (IPG) has been produced for the West Bar
          Quarter23.. It was adopted as a material consideration for determining planning
          applications.

          Wicker / Riverside

1.72      This is an area at the northern edge of the City Centre that has suffered
          steady decline over many decades. The Wicker is a key pedestrian, public
          transport and private vehicle gateway into the City Centre that is
          underachieving and the volume of traffic along Nursery Street, as part of the
          de facto Inner Relief Road, has led to the river being inaccessible and the area
          becoming severed from the City Centre.


23
     West Bar Interim Planning Guidance. Sheffield City Council (July 2006)

                                                   16
1.73   The area has recently benefited from residential development at Riverside
       Exchange and Nursery Street, and further new housing will be provided on the
       Hancock and Lant site (by Lady’s Bridge) and as part of the Priority Sites
       scheme at Blonk Street, proposing speculative office development and the
       refurbishment of Security House on Joiner Street for flexible live/work units.

1.74   An Action Plan for the area is currently under production and was the subject
       of a consultation exercise in May 2007. This is expected to be completed in
       September 2007.

       Areas where Change is not Envisaged

1.75   There are certain parts of Sheffield where we anticipate that little significant
       change will occur over the period of the forthcoming Core Strategy (i.e. to
       2026). In these areas the Core Strategy would emphasise stability and the
       safeguarding of what we have. The nature of the City Centre is such that
       there are very few areas where little or no change is expected, but there are
       areas of residential use that are expected to continue for many years,
       especially where new residential uses have recently been introduced. These
       areas are:

       (a) To the west and south west of Devonshire Green, particularly West One
           and Broomspring. These were identified in the Unitary Development Plan
           as Housing Priority Areas and it is envisaged that they will remain as
           residential areas.

       (b) The housing area around St George’s Close has just been redeveloped,
           and its principle use will continue to be residential.

       (c) Other, smaller residential areas have developed since the Unitary
           Development Plan was adopted. These are also expected to remain for
           some time in residential use. Examples are either side of Leadmill Street,
           the Victoria Hall student flats on Wellington Street and the immediate area
           and the Alma Street area in Kelham Island.

1.76   Other parts of the city are also expected to retain their current primary uses:

       (a) The Transport Interchange, including the Midland railway station.

       (b) The academic institutions of Sheffield Hallam University and the University
           of Sheffield are expected to retain their presence in the City Centre.
           Indeed, some expansion of the universities, particularly their business
           partnerships, is likely (see policy SCC5, chapter 6).

       (c) Regionally important leisure facilities such as the City Hall, Lyceum
           Theatre, Crucible Theatre and Pond’s Forge and cultural facilities such as
           the Millennium Galleries, Winter Gardens, Graves Art Gallery and the
           Central Library will continue to provide sport and cultural facilities and
           tourist destinations for residents and visitors (see policy SCC4, chapter 5.



                                           17
(d) Public Spaces at Devonshire Green, the Peace Gardens, Hallam Square,
    Cathedral Square, Sheaf Valley, Park Square, Tudor Square, Barker’s
    Pool and Fitzalan Square are expected to continue to provide an important
    recreational and environmental contribution to the City.




                                  18
2        CITY CENTRE QUARTERS
          Introduction
2.1       The previous chapter has shown how the City Centre currently has many
          different areas that each has a distinctive character. The promotion of these
          as ‘quarters’ that can specialise in particular uses is a way of allowing as wide
          a variety of uses as possible in the City Centre

2.2       The City Centre is important in providing a wide range of types of development
          that serve the whole of the city and the City Region. This variety can create
          tensions within the centre between different competing claims. The main land
          uses in the City Centre are offices, shops, cultural and leisure facilities, the
          universities and housing.

2.3       The Council has produced an Urban Design Compendium24 for Sheffield City
          Centre following extensive consultation that outlined broad urban design
          principles for the City Centre and detailed guidance for a series of City Centre
          Quarters in terms of design and land use mix. More detailed guidance has
          been provided by a series of Action Plans for some of the Quarters, which
          have also been subject to public consultation.

2.4       Some uses stand out as candidates for segregation in specific areas or
          quarters. For example, night-time uses such as pubs, bars, cafes and
          nightclubs may not co-exist well with housing. The use of quarters that can
          ‘specialise’ in particular uses could be a way of allowing as wide a variety of
          uses as possible in the City Centre, whilst still keeping certain potentially
          conflicting uses apart to some degree.

2.5       ‘Quarters’ are defined as “A distinctive area of the City Centre that displays a
          unique character and is an area in which it would be appropriate to have a
          unique development programme and set of policies”.

          Policy SCC1 City Centre Quarters

          The distinctive and fundamental roles of different ‘quarters’ of the City
          Centre will be consolidated and strengthened, namely:

              (a) Heart of the City, including the New Retail Quarter – the prime
                  office and retail streets and main civic, arts and cultural buildings,
                  with high-quality public spaces. Shopping and visitor facilities, in
                  particular, will be improved;

              (b) Cathedral Quarter – currently the main professional, legal and
                  financial district, strengthened by the introduction of a richer mix
                  of uses including residential, leisure and retail;



24
     Sheffield City Centre Urban Design Compendium, September 2004

                                                19
(c) Cultural Industries Quarter – an area with a wide mix of uses and
    established as the main location for the city's creative and digital
    industries, as one of the key growth clusters for the economy of
    the City Region;

(d) Sheaf Valley – an important gateway area and the academic focus
    for Sheffield Hallam University;

(e) The Moor – a linear retail area anchored by several major stores
    and the proposed location for the new indoor market, that also has
    considerable potential for mixed office and residential uses and
    will experience major changes;

(f) Devonshire Quarter – a thriving, distinctive and vibrant area with
    city living, niche shops, restaurants and bars and a variety of
    business uses with the City Centre’s largest green space,
    Devonshire Green;

(g) St. George’s – a mixed area that is an academic focus for the
    University of Sheffield, with complementary retail and business
    uses;

(h) St. Vincent’s – a mixed business, residential and educational area
    with links to the University of Sheffield and the legal and
    professional quarter and including a number of manufacturing
    companies that will require sensitive attention;

(i) Castlegate – an area for a mix of uses including offices, housing,
    hotels and leisure, linking the Heart of the City with Victoria
    Quays, as a focus for mixed waterside uses – relocation of the
    central Markets will reduce the retail presence and create potential
    for the viewing of the Sheffield Castle ruins;

(j) Kelham/ Neepsend – formerly dominated by industry but
    becoming a focus for new riverside housing and jobs with the
    Inner Relief Road as a catalyst to redevelopment – existing small
    businesses will continue to perform an important economic role
    for the City as a whole;

(k) West Bar – a mixed area of predominantly business uses, with a
    possible emphasis on the legal and financial professions, being
    located close to the Courts complex; also a location for new
    housing and a new neighbourhood centre and public space;

(l) Wicker/ Riverside – a gateway location on the Inner Relief Road
    and key business area with new housing taking full advantage of
    the opportunities presented by the river.




                              20
        Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
        National Policy

2.6     The submitted policy accords with advice from the Government in its planning
        policy statement (PPS6), which suggests that local planning authorities
        consider the roles of different parts of their centres. Annexe A of PPS6 states:

            “In planning the future of town centres, local planning authorities should
            consider the function of different parts of the centre and how these
            contribute to its overall vitality and viability.”

2.7     The policy will also help to deliver the aim of PPS6 set out in paragraph 2.31:

            “Local planning authorities may need to make choices between competing
            development pressures in town centres”

2.8     The submitted policy will help to balance City Centre uses and ensure they are
        all developed in the right places and at the most appropriate levels.

        Regional Policy

2.9     The submitted policy is in line with Policy SY1 B on page 92 in the draft
        Regional Spatial Strategy, that seeks to:

            “Support the role of Sheffield as a major provider of jobs and the
            regeneration of much of Sheffield City Centre, with a range of quarters…”

        The RSS recognises that Sheffield City Centre has a unique character that is
        personified by the quarters, that bring economic benefits that should be
        supported. The Panel Report25 into the draft Plan has not recommended any
        changes to this policy.

        Sub-Regional Policy

2.10    This approach is further supported by the South Yorkshire Spatial Strategy 26.
        The Urban Area Vision on pages 14 states:

            “The city will undertake major redevelopment of much of its commercial
            heart with different quarters designed to make the city centre into a visitor
            attraction in its own right.”

        Other Sheffield Policies

2.11    Current work on the roll-forward of the City Centre Masterplan has recognised
        that the quarters are an important planning tool and an effective way of
        highlighting and enhancing the character and function of different parts of the

25
   The Yorkshire And Humber Plan - The Regional Spatial Strategy Examination In Public 12
September–26 October 2006 -Report Of The Panel (March 2007)
26
   Sub-Regional Spatial Strategy Vision for South Yorkshire. Ideasmiths Consulting Partnership /
South Yorkshire Partnership (November 2004)

                                                 21
       City Centre. It considers that the interfaces and integration between Quarters
       and the creation of strong physical and functional linkages between different
       parts of the City Centre are important.

2.12   The Night-time Uses Interim Planning Guidance27 imposes some restrictions
       on the hours of operation of night-time uses in three of the quarters where
       residential use is promoted, namely the Devonshire Quarter, Heart of the City
       and Cathedral Quarter, which supports this element of the submitted policy.

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)
2.13   There is no specific reference in the 2007 City Strategy document to the City
       Centre quarters, although there is considered to be no conflict with the policy.

       Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
       6)

       Core Strategy Objectives

2.14   The policy specifically needs to help achieve the following Core Strategy
       objectives:

          S14.1 Enhanced character and distinctiveness of neighbourhoods,
           respecting existing local character and built and natural features to provide
           the context for new development

2.15   Each of the City Centre quarters has its own particular local character, and as
       the City Centre will become an increasingly important residential area of the
       City, this element of the core strategy objectives will be increasingly met.

2.16   The policy is consistent with other Core Strategy policies within the City Centre
       chapter will assist in their delivery. Policy SCC3 refers the New Retail
       Quarter, several quarters that are particularly suited to residential uses are
       referred to in SCC6, and SCC7 recognises the transitional nature of four City
       Centre quarters. The promotion of quarters that can specialise in particular
       uses is a way of allowing as wide a variety of uses as possible in the City
       Centre, whilst still keeping certain potentially conflicting uses apart to some
       degree.

       Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

2.17   This policy is geographically very locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any
       neighbouring authorities will have policies that will impact upon it.
       Rotherham’s Core Strategy28 makes no reference to Sheffield’s City Centre
       quarters, and the other neighbouring local authorities have yet to produce
       development plan documents that can be considered alongside this policy for
       compatibility.

27
 Night-time Uses Interim Planning Guidance. Sheffield City Council (October 2005)
28
 Rotherham Local Development Framework – Core Strategy Preferred Options. Rotherham
Metropolitan Borough Council (January 2007)

                                            22
       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
2.18   Two options were proposed for this issue. The first was to allow uses to
       disperse evenly throughout the City Centre if the market proposed such
       development, whilst the second was to concentrate particular types of uses in
       certain parts of the City Centre, to build on the existing distinctive quarters.

       Option CC5a Plan for types of development, e.g. leisure, retail, housing
       and offices to be dispersed in all areas of the City Centre.

2.19   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) Problems of nuisance could be dispersed throughout the City Centre.

       (b) This option could deliver more choice for restaurants, cafes, pubs,
           nightclubs, shops and offices for their locational decisions and their
           methods and hours of operation.

       (c) The option promotes greater mixing of uses that could mean less travel
           within the City Centre.

2.20   The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) The dilution of certain uses, particularly retail and offices, could adversely
           affect their viability.

       (b) The distinctive leisure and cultural quarters that are more attractive for the
           evening economy of the city as a whole, would be diluted.

       (c) This option for mixing uses could also mean that people living in any part
           of the City Centre could be subject to disturbance, which could jeopardise
           the prospects for regeneration through City Centre living.

       Option CC5b Emphasise the distinctive role of different ‘quarters’ of the
       City Centre, e.g. plan for quarters where leisure development can be
       concentrated.

2.21   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) This option encourages parts of the City Centre that have a particularly
           distinctive character to develop their own identity and act as more of a
           draw, making it clearer to visitors and residents where certain facilities are
           likely to be located.

       (b) A concentrated retail quarter is likely to have significant economic
           advantages (see policy SCC3 below), as the greater the number of outlets
           and total retail floorspace, the greater the overall draw to the area.

       (c) The clustering effect of this approach means that the viability of the uses is
           increased. A concentration of offices can create a business destination

                                            23
          and can support hotel and conferencing facilities, for example, art and
          crafts outlets, if located together, can become a significant tourist and
          leisure draw.

       (d) Residential quarters can be concentrated in the better environmental
           areas, thereby improving their attractiveness as a residential location.

2.22   The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) Such clustering of leisure uses like pubs, bars and takeaways can increase
           anti-social behaviour, that would be diluted if these uses were spread
           around the City Centre.

       (b) This option could also discourage mixed development, which can be more
           viable in individual schemes.

       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Planning Reasons

2.23   Some of the quarters have developed over many years, others have more
       recently developed their unique characteristics. The two options considered
       were opposites, one favouring a market-led approach, where uses can
       develop in any part of the City Centre where development opportunities arise.
       The rejected option does not promote the quarters concept, whereas the
       submitted policy, to preserve, develop and create individual areas, seeks to
       continue recent trends in development and in policy, where the quarters have
       been seen to provide positive benefits to the City Centre and the City as a
       whole. Since the 1990’s, the City Council has promoted certain parts of the
       City Centre for specific development, and the approach has since been
       endorsed in other strategies.

2.24   The option to promote quarters was chosen as the submitted policy because it
       was considered that quarters that develop their own identity and functions can
       act as more of a draw than if the uses were dispersed. They can then be
       more vibrant and viable because they are likely to become destinations in their
       own right, rather than being simply a part of the City Centre. The existence of
       such Quarters makes it clearer to visitors and residents where certain facilities
       are likely to be located and also make it easier to visit alternative
       establishments that together might be able to offer a range of goods or
       services. Quarters can attract particular users and develop niche markets.

2.25   Some uses stand out as candidates for segregation in specific areas or
       quarters. For example, night-time uses such as pubs, bars, cafes and
       nightclubs may not co-exist well with housing. The use of quarters that can
       ‘specialise’ in particular uses could be a way of allowing the wide variety of
       uses needed in all successful City Centres, whilst still keeping certain
       potentially conflicting uses separate, something that is a particular challenge
       for such a compact City Centre as Sheffield’s.



                                           24
2.26        The development of distinctive quarters will support urban renaissance by
            building on existing positive qualities, enabling creativity and vibrancy whilst
            not appearing too contrived.

2.27        Quarters with distinct roles and functions can attract particular users and
            develop niche markets. Similar businesses can cluster together and achieve
            economic benefits by sharing knowledge and resources, increasing the
            viability of the retail uses. For example, people are more likely to visit shops
            that are located close to each other than those that are isolated from other
            retail outlets. A concentration of offices can support hotel and conferencing
            facilities.

2.28        A concentrated retail quarter is likely to have significant economic advantages.
            Most retailers would prefer to be part of an area that had as high concentration
            of other shops as possible, as the greater the number of outlets and total retail
            floorspace, the greater the overall draw to the area, and the more potential
            customers will visit (see policy SCC3, chapter 4).

2.29        Reinforcing the distinctiveness of areas makes the City Centre more attractive
            as a leisure destination. Creating a concentration of a type of uses can make
            them into destinations in themselves. Art and crafts outlets, for example, if
            located together, can become a significant tourist and leisure draw. In
            particular, the cultural hub in the Heart of the City around the library, galleries
            and theatres, can be a strong and distinctive destination (see also policy
            SCC4, chapter 5). Where leisure uses are concentrated they also become
            more of a draw and make more efficient use of the transport infrastructure.
            This is particularly important for smaller operations such as cafes, pubs and
            bars.

2.30        Residential quarters can be concentrated in the better environmental areas,
            thereby improving their attractiveness as a residential location, and making the
            regeneration of certain parts of the City through City Centre living more
            feasible (see policy SCC6, chapter 7).

2.31        The new national planning policy statement (PPS25)29on flood risk requires
            local authorities to consider risk in both allocating sites for development and
            determining planning applications.

2.32        The Heart of the City (including New Retail Quarter), the Cathedral Quarter,
            the Moor, the Devonshire Quarter, St. George’s, St. Vincent’s Quarter and
            West Bar are situated in Zone 1 Low Probability. About half of the Cultural
            Industries Quarter (south and east) is situated within Zone 3a High Probability,
            due to flooding from the River Porter and the River Sheaf. The Sheaf Valley
            Quarter is partially situated within Zone 3a High Probability. Nearly all of
            Kelham/Neepsend and Wicker/Riverside are situated in Zone 3a High
            Probability, subject to flooding from the River Don.

2.33        Even in the quarters with areas with a high probability of flooding it is not
            considered that the risk is sufficient to influence the choice of option or the
            vision for that quarter.
29
     Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk, DCLG, December 2006.

                                                           25
       Sustainability Appraisal

2.34   As the submitted policy promotes different quarters for particular types of
       uses, it performs better that the rejected option in terms of delivering
       economic, educational and housing sustainability benefits. It is also
       considered to contribute towards providing a safer environment, improving
       transport accessibility and helping to preserve the city’s cultural heritage.

       Equality Appraisal

2.35   There were equality benefits of the policy over the rejected option, as it
       benefits those with low access to private transport and those on low incomes,
       by promoting a range of similar uses in the City Centre, in the same area,
       making choice more available to public transport users than if they were
       dispersed in several areas.

       Consultation Responses

2.36   This preferred option is derived from the emerging option CC5b (see
       paragraph (a) above).

2.37   There was virtually unanimous support for the policy at the Emerging Options
       consultation stage, including from Sheffield One, Yorkshire Forward and the
       CPRE. In particular, the CPRE said:

              [the preferred option] “supports the urban renaissance. These areas
              must build on existing qualities and functional relationships, be
              innovative and exciting but not too contrived.”

2.38   There was also overall support for the policy at Preferred Options stage, from
       the University of Sheffield and Yorkshire Forward.

       Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

2.39   A successful City Centre needs to provide a significant draw, and this will
       result from the facilities it provides, as well as the overall attractiveness of the
       place itself as a destination. For a City Centre to be ‘user-friendly’, it needs
       coherence, and one that has distinct areas within it, that each serve a
       particular purpose and have their own character will, taken together, make up
       a more viable destination than one without such an identity. The submitted
       policy is considered to be essential to ensure that Sheffield City Centre has
       this pull factor.

       Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)

2.40   The policy will be implemented by:

          The provision of Action Plans for each of the quarters identified in the
           policy, that focus on the particular character of the area and set out clear
           visions for how the strengths of the quarters will be capitalised and built on.

                                            26
           They will set out clear visions of how the areas will develop in the future.
           Current Action Plans / Masterplans, etc. that cover the City Centre are set
           out in detail in Chapter 13.

          Decisions on planning applications will also be made with regard to the
           character of the particular City Centre quarter in which the site is located.

       More details of delivery mechanisms are included in the Delivery Schedules in
       Appendix 1.

2.41   There is a balance to be struck between mixing uses and achieving a viable
       amount of development in a particular location. This balance will be monitored
       using the indicators for the Annual Monitoring Report.

2.42   The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
       policy SCC1. However, a number of the targets and indicators for policies in
       the topic chapters are directly relevant and are described in the related
       Background Report:

          Business and Industry Background Report – see policy SB3.
          Shopping and Leisure Background Report – see policies SS1 and SS4.
          Housing Background Report – see policies

       Progress against the targets in these policies will be reported in the SDF
       Annual Monitoring Report (AMR).

2.43   The mix of new development in each of the City Centre quarters will also be
       monitored and data recorded on the City Council’s planning applications
       database. This would not, however, be reported in the AMR but the
       information will be used to inform allocations in the City Sites document and
       future reviews of the Core Strategy.

       Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
2.44   This is not a prescriptive policy, but is intended to guide development and
       avoid the mixing of uses that could damage the character of the quarters and
       the City Centre as a whole. It is considered relatively flexible, but also has
       weight due to its coherence with Regional and other strategies for the City, as
       well as support from consultees and sustainability benefits.

2.45   Such clustering of leisure uses like pubs, bars and takeaways can increase
       anti-social behaviour, that would be diluted if these uses were spread around
       the City Centre. Consideration will need to be given as to how some mixing of
       uses and urban design can help to deal with this possible negative outcome,
       without diluting the benefits of the clustering of the preferred uses. This will be
       a matter for Area Action Plans.

2.46   The potential for mixed development could be reduced by encouraging similar
       uses to cluster in specific quarters. Area Action Plans need to ensure that the
       quarters do not encourage single uses to become so dominant that they drive
       out all other uses and create a sterile and characterless environment and the

                                            27
       menus of preferred and acceptable uses in the City Policies document will
       help to encourage this.

2.47   A benefit of mixing uses rather than focussing on a dominant use for an area
       is that vitality can be retained throughout the day with two different uses such
       as business and leisure. Wherever possible this aspect of mixing should be
       encouraged within the quarters.

       Conclusion
2.48   The approach of promoting quarters has been well established in Sheffield
       and has become enshrined in other policy documents, although it was a new
       planning policy approach at the time of the Unitary Development Plan. With
       increasing competition between Sheffield City Centre and other centres,
       including other centres within the City, it is vital that the City Centre continues
       to perform a function as the main provider of a range of services for the City
       and the City Region. . It is considered that the character of Sheffield City
       Centre is defined very much by its quarters, and this needs to be supported
       and promoted by policies in the Sheffield Development Framework.




                                            28
3.    OFFICES IN THE CITY CENTRE
      Introduction
3.1   This chapter addresses the issue of how far well-defined office-dominated
      areas in the City Centre are necessary to attract the kinds of business needed
      to transform the city’s economy and enable Sheffield to become a major
      regional employment centre. It analyses the need to create ‘commercial
      zones’ in Sheffield, balancing this with an approach of allowing flexibility and
      choice of location by not specifying areas for concentrations of office uses.

3.2   Major office schemes need to be accessible to workers. The Government, in
      PPS6, has stated that offices are suitable only in existing centres as
      accessible locations. The City Centre is extremely well connected in terms of
      transport links, but some parts are more accessible for employees than others,
      and therefore could be more attractive to office occupiers. But more
      peripheral locations may be cheaper to develop and could be more accessible
      by car, which makes them attractive to other potential occupiers. There are
      several other important City Centre land uses, such as shopping, leisure and
      housing, which also need to be accommodated in the most suitable areas for
      them. The City Centre has limited space and needs to cater for many types of
      businesses and people, which have to be balanced with the need to
      accommodate the city’s requirement for offices.

3.3   As part of the background work for the Sheffield Development Framework, the
      City Council commissioned independent consultants to determine what the
      requirement for employment land should be (see Policy SB1 and the Business
      and Industry Background Report), as well as assessing the quality and
      suitability of identified sites to meet this requirement. This included separate
      need and supply assessments for office use, that will help to determine the
      extent of office areas that should be designated through the Sheffield
      Development Framework.

3.4   For the purposes of the SDF, ‘Offices’ are defined as ‘Uses falling within Class
      B1(a) of the Use Classes Order’.

      Policy SCC2 Offices in the City Centre
      New large-scale and high-density office development will be
      concentrated in the City Centre in Priority Office Areas:

         (a) in the Heart of the City and Eyre Street, particularly for prestige
             office accommodation

         (b) at Moorfoot and Charter Row, particularly for headquarters and
             other high-quality offices

         (c) the Digital Campus/ Sheaf Valley areas in front of the railway
             station, particularly for digital, creative and knowledge-based
             businesses


                                         29
          (d) along the new northern Inner Relief Road and Tenter Street,
              particularly for professional, financial and legal services

          (e) Castlegate, on the west side of Park Square, particularly for
              professional, financial and legal services.

       Major office development will be promoted and encouraged in these
       locations. Other uses that provide for active frontages and a vibrant
       street scene such as cafés, restaurants and leisure will be encouraged in
       small amounts. Mixed uses including a suitable proportion of housing
       may also be appropriate. Significant amounts of new office floorspace
       will also be located in other areas of the City Centre, including
       development as part of mixed schemes, together with housing where
       appropriate.

       Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
       National Policy

3.5    Major office schemes need to be accessible to workers. Government
       guidance30 identifies offices as a main town centre use and requires offices to
       be in the most accessible locations where there is a need for them. The policy
       will also help to take forward the issue raised in PPS6 and set out in
       paragraph 2.31:

              “Local planning authorities may need to make choices between
              competing development pressures in town centres”.

3.6    Policy SCC2 will ensure that sufficient office development is completed to
       deliver economic aims, whilst allowing a balance of other uses.

3.7    Government guidance requires local planning authorities to undertake
       Employment Land Reviews to determine their employment requirements and
       seek to safeguard sites to meet the need.31 Accordingly, the City Council
       commissioned research to help determine the demand for employment land 32
       and subsequently to examine the quality of the supply of employment sites.33
       This research has suggested that the City is generally short of land for
       employment uses, including land for office use (the whole issue of
       employment land requirements and allocations is covered in greater detail in
       the Business and Industry Background Report and the City Centre Sites and
       Areas Preferred Options Background Report). As a result, there is a need to
       identify land in suitable areas that will be designated and protected for office
       uses. The City Centre (along with the edge of the City Centre) is the most
       important area for office use, as set out in Policy SB3, and designated priority
       office areas are needed to focus development and ensure that sufficient office
       development is achieved..


30
   Planning Policy Statement 6:Planning for Town Centres. ODPM (March 2005)
31
   Employment Land Reviews: Guidance Note. ODPM (December 2004) ISBN 1 85112 759 3
32
   Employment Land Demand Assessment for the City of Sheffield. Arup (July 2006)
33
   Sheffield Employment Sites Survey. Atkins (March 2007)

                                           30
       Regional Policy

3.8    The overall approach in the Regional Spatial Strategy, in policy YH1,
       emphasises the need to improve accessibility to employment, to create more
       and better jobs and to facilitate fewer and shorter journeys. Concentrating
       employment in the City Centre, particularly in accessible Priority Office Areas,
       will help to achieve these policy aims (although the Panel Report has
       recommended deletion and replacement of this policy with a new policy setting
       out key spatial priorities).

3.9    Promoting office development in the City Centre is in line with Policy YH5 (iv)
       of the draft RSS, that seeks to

          “Strengthen the identity and roles of city/town centres as accessible and
          vibrant focal points for high trip generating uses”.

3.10   It is considered that the submitted policy will strengthen the role of the City
       Centre as a major office centre and help to deliver the aims of the draft
       Regional Spatial Strategy.

       Sub-Regional Policy

3.11   Page 11 of the South Yorkshire Spatial Strategy recognises that:

          “The vision will require: building on the potential of the city centre with high-
          quality commercial sites and premises”.

3.12   Concentrating office uses in the City Centre and prioritising certain areas will
       help to deliver this aim, by creating strong, viable office locations.

       Other Sheffield Policies

3.13   Ongoing work on the roll-forward of the City Centre Masterplan has so far
       identified the need to create a critical mass of development prioritise particular
       locations for the development and consolidation of business. It recognises the
       importance of office development and that strong commercial office
       development will drive job levels, the eating and drinking requirement in the
       city centre, increase hotel demand and improve the overall vibrancy of the City
       Centre. Major office development will complement projects such as the New
       Retail Quarter and underpin the long-term viability of the city centre economy.
       It is likely to advocate a new business district between the station and Arundel
       Gate to incorporate the digital campus development and the Heart of the City /
       Eyre Street, as research has indicated a latent demand for centrally located,
       quality office accommodation here that represents the best grade A office
       buildings in the most competitive location. Other Priority Office Areas
       identified in policy SCC2 are also likely to be supported by the Masterplan
       proposals.

3.14   Members of Sheffield 100 Forum attended a consultation exercise in the roll-
       forward of the City Centre Masterplan on July 26th, 2006. The report of their


                                           31
       comments,34 on page 5 shows that there was general support for the provision
       of new employment opportunities and high quality office accommodation.

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)
3.15   One of the ‘Big Ambitions’ of the 2007 City Strategy is for Sheffield to have an
       economy that matches the best in Europe. A City Centre that has distinctive
       office locations that will provide a draw for major occupiers will be a key to
       delivering this ambition.

       Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
       6)

       Core Strategy Objectives

3.16   By concentrating office development in the City Centre in key locations, this
       policy addresses the following Core Strategy objectives:

          S1.1 Conditions created for a balanced, diverse and sustainable high-
           growth economy in the Sheffield city region;

          S1.3 Environments created, improved and conserved to attract business
           investment, including high-technology manufacturing and knowledge-
           based services;

          S2.1 The City Centre and complementary areas regenerated as the core
           location for major expansion of business, shopping, leisure and culture;

          S5.4 Workplaces located where they are accessible to all by a range of
           transport options, including from areas of high unemployment;

          S9.1 Development located to limit the distances people and goods need to
           travel, with mixing of land uses and increased opportunities for single
           journeys to serve several purposes;

          S9.2 High-density development focussed on the most accessible
           locations;

          S10.3 New development that generates significant trips carried out only in
           areas accessible by a choice of sustainable forms of transport;

          S12.1 Previously developed land and existing buildings in urban areas
           reclaimed and re-used for all types of development, in preference to
           greenfield land.

3.17   The policy supports the Core Strategy policy on office locations, SB3, that
       seeks to locate the majority of office development in Sheffield in the City
       Centre as the most accessible location for major office development. But

34
  Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Review and Roll-Forward – Sheffield 100 Workshop. EDAW
(2006)

                                              32
       some parts of the City Centre are more suited to office uses than others, and
       other key City Centre uses that also need to be accommodated. So the best
       office locations need to be specifically identified and promoted.

       Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

3.18   This policy is geographically very locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any
       neighbouring authorities will have policies that will impact upon it.
       Rotherham’s Core Strategy Preferred focuses offices in its town centre.

       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
3.19   Two Emerging Options were considered, the first to concentrate office
       development in certain parts of the City Centre, the second to allow dispersal
       throughout the City Centre.

       Option CC2a Offices concentrated in important core office areas. These
       could be, for example, along the new Inner Relief Road, Tenter Street /
       West Bar, Eyre Street, the Digital-Campus area and Castlegate. Other
       uses will be strictly limited in these areas.

3.20   This option would seek to create new areas where offices would be very much
       the dominant use.

3.21   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) Well-defined office areas in central locations are necessary to attract the
           kinds of business needed to transform the city’s economy and enable
           Sheffield to become a major regional employment centre.

       (b) Defining Priority Office Areas enables the allocation of sites specifically for
           office use, helping to meet employment requirements and deliver job
           targets as set out in the City Strategy.

       (c) A concentration of offices in particular locations can support
           complementary developments, such as hotels and conferencing facilities.
           Established commercial zones can also help to encourage other
           compatible uses that will attract workers, such as cafes, bars and
           restaurants.

       (d) Offices are more attractive and viable if located in prominent, high-profile
           locations, where companies can ‘be seen’.

       (e) Creating areas with a high concentration of office development could
           improve accessibility and public transport provision.

       (f) There are parts of the City Centre that have potential for redevelopment,
           where there are opportunities for new business destinations to be created.

3.22   The weakness of this option is:


                                            33
       (a) There is a danger that the concentration of offices in Priority Office Areas
           could reduce the demand for offices in other parts of the City Centre, if
           they were to be seen as ‘secondary’.

       Option CC2b Offices dispersed throughout the City Centre

3.23   This option would allow for office development to take place in any
       concentrations anywhere in the City Centre.


3.24   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) It could achieve more mixing of uses throughout the City Centre.

       (b) Identified development sites could have more flexibility in terms of the uses
           they may deliver.

3.25   The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) It gives no guarantee of delivery of the required scale of office uses, which
           could make it difficult to deliver the requirements set out in Policy SB1, and
           also to deliver Policy SB3.

       (b) The advantages of specific, focussed office locations may not be delivered.

       (c) Some office occupiers that would look to well defined office areas might
           not be drawn to Sheffield.

       (d) Office development is likely to take place in areas that are not the most
           accessible and sustainable locations.

       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Planning Reasons

3.26   The policy represents the favoured option to focus office development in
       particular areas that are the most viable and suitable locations. This will
       attract a greater number and variety of office occupiers. The locations set out
       in the submitted policy are considered appropriate to appeal to a wide range of
       potential occupiers as demonstrated below. The policy also recognises that
       there is a need to also provide some office development in other parts of the
       City Centre.

3.27   It is clear from comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of the two options
       that well-defined office-dominated areas in central locations are preferable and
       indeed necessary to attract the kinds of business needed to transform the
       city’s economy and enable Sheffield to become a major regional employment
       centre. The office market has picked up significantly in the last three years
       and there is a need for more modern, high-quality floorspace, to meet the
       requirements of potential occupiers and investors. There are parts of the City


                                           34
       Centre that present immediate and identifiable opportunities for
       redevelopment, where land is underused and buildings are old.

3.28   Offices are particularly appropriate in the City Centre as they deliver a greater
       density of employment per square metre of floorspace than other employment
       uses, so promotion of them through Priority Office Areas will increase the
       capacity for office development in the City as a whole.

3.29   Currently there are inadequate established ‘commercial zones’ in Sheffield,
       but most businesses would prefer to be located in areas that have a strong
       commercial character. Offices are more attractive and viable if located in
       prominent, high-profile locations and these need to offer modern, high quality
       premises, but many businesses prefer to be located in areas that have a
       strong commercial character. The customers of companies will tend to have
       greater respect for a business that is located centrally in a well-known location
       and close to other prestigious firms. This can only happen if there are suitable
       areas within the City Centre for offices to concentrate.

3.30   Creating areas with a high concentration of office development, rather than
       spreading development around the City Centre creates the potential for
       improved accessibility, as public transport links and public car parks can be
       located to serve an area where there is a significant level of visitor and worker
       activity. Public transport improvements, particularly, are only likely to be
       provided if there is a critical mass of new development and resulting
       commuters that create sufficient demand for new services.

3.31   The Heart of the City and Eyre Street area represents an extension to the first
       phase of the Heart of the City scheme that has created a new prime office
       location. Rental levels on phase one are the highest ever achieved in
       Sheffield and there is a need to increase this provision of grade A office space
       (as noted in the work on the City Centre Masterplan – see paragraph 3.13
       above). This likely to be a priority of the City Centre Masterplan, which is
       seeking to create a new business district.

3.32   However, there is also a need (identified in the City Centre Masterplan work)
       to cater for prestige new development that may not be suited to the ‘prime’ or
       grade A locations. There are also limits on capacity in these areas. Moorfoot
       and Charter Row are locations that would be suitable for other large-scale
       office development and high-quality office floorspace, as established areas
       that offer significant redevelopment opportunities.

3.33   Policy SB4 has identified the need to cater for the main growth area, the
       knowledge-based, creative and digital sector. It is appropriate to identify a
       specific area that could provide for this type of business, and the Sheaf Valley
       area, being close to the Science Park and Hallam University main campus, is
       considered suitable. Its proximity to the railway station and Interchange make
       it highly appropriate and generally sustainable as an office location.

3.34   Because of the limited capacity for new office development in the City Centre,
       there is a need to take advantage of all sustainable opportunities for new
       development. The building of the northern section of the Inner Relief Road

                                           35
       has resulted in many old properties being removed and has created a
       significant amount of new, vacant, development land. Much of this is
       considered suitable for office development, particularly as the location next to
       the Inner Relief Road makes it accessible and highly visible. It is also not well
       suited to housing use, due to the amenity issues that result from its location
       next to a busy road. Therefore, it is considered beneficial to specifically
       identify an area close to this section of the Inner Relief Road for office use. It
       is also adjacent to an area that is established as a location for financial and
       legal companies, so should be identified specifically as suited to such
       companies and promoted accordingly.

3.35   Castlegate is an area that has several advantages. It is an area where recent
       new office development has taken place and there is a committed developer
       that is expected to produce more office floorspace here in the future. It is an
       important strategic location and a gateway area at the end of the Sheffield
       Parkway and close to the railway station and interchange.

3.36   These Priority Office Areas will be predominantly for office use, but there will
       also be a need for some mixing with other appropriate uses that complement
       offices. In particular, cafés, bars and restaurants will be needed to serve
       workers and customers. Most companies would expect to have a reasonable
       supply of these supporting facilities and lively uses within the areas they
       occupy. Leisure uses, such as fitness centres will also be required, as well as
       other uses that support business activity, such as hotels and conference
       facilities. Housing can also be appropriate, as it creates a presence outside of
       office hours that can improve security. Active street level frontages can be
       created in this way, adding not only to the viability of the office areas, but to
       the overall attractiveness and vibrancy of the City Centre. These uses,
       however, should be limited to an appropriate level to ensure that office uses
       dominate the area, in order to deliver the benefits set out in this chapter.

3.37   National policy on flood risk is noted in chapter 2 in the Planning Reasons
       section (paragraph 2.31. However, parts of Eyre Street, and the Digital
       Campus / Sheaf Valley are situated within Zone 3a High Probability,
       associated with flooding from the River Sheaf. Office development is classed
       as ‘less vulnerable’, according to the Flood Risk Vulnerability Classification in
       PPS25. Development of these uses in Zone 3a is therefore not precluded by
       PPS25, but developments in the affected areas must satisfy the criteria in the
       City Policies document, incorporating flood mitigation and warning measures.
       Specific allocations in the City Sites document will also take account of the risk
       of flooding in the specific area in the light of current advice from the
       Environment Agency and any proposals for flood protection. There are no
       known localised non-river flooding issues within this area, though there is a
       susceptibility to culvert blockage and/or surcharging if regular maintenance is
       not carried out.

       Sustainability Appraisal

3.38   This option is considered highly sustainable, as it helps to create sustainable
       transport patterns and make efficient use of the transport network. There are
       economic advantages that will benefit job creation in concentrating office uses

                                           36
         in particular areas of the City Centre. Concentrated office areas are likely to
         be more secure than office uses dispersed throughout the City Centre, and
         can help to support the provision of cultural and leisure facilities are available
         to most of the population.

         Equality Appraisal

3.39     The policy concentrates office uses in particular locations that are along routes
         that have frequent public transport services, that reduces the need for private
         transport. This helps people with low access to private transport and those on
         low incomes.

         Consultation Responses

3.40     The policy is based on the preferred option, which, in turn, was derived from
         the emerging option CC2a (see paragraph 3.20 above). It was favoured by
         nearly all of the respondents, including stakeholders such as Sheffield First for
         Investment, Sheffield One and Yorkshire Forward. Sheffield First for
         Investment supported the Emerging Option because of:

             “the need to protect a range of sites suitable for offices and also express a
             clear long term strategy to developers for these uses.”35

3.41     However, Yorkshire Forward’s support for the Emerging Option was qualified,
         as follows:

             “a more dispersed approach to office development across the City Centre
             could support continued investment in mixed use schemes and ensure that
             the different Quarters remain active during both the day and evening.
             Offices as part of mixed developments are important to ensure the office
             offer in the City Centre continues to grow. So smaller scale office
             proposals, or offices as part of mixed use proposals could be dispersed
             through the City Centre.”36

3.42     It is considered that this concern is now addressed by the submitted policy by
         also identifying the role that other parts of the City Centre are expected to play
         in delivering office uses.

3.43     There was more limited comment on the Preferred Option, and more
         objections than support. Yorkshire Forward objected to the inclusion of the E-
         Campus (now Digital Campus) / Sheaf Valley area in the policy on the
         grounds that it should be more of a mixed development. This was not
         accepted, due to the suitability of the sites for major office development as a
         result of Its proximity to the railway station and Interchange making it a
         sustainable office location (see paragraph 3.33).

3.44      Other objections focussed on a perceived lack of demand for offices but this
         is considered to be more of an issue for policy SB1 and evidence for the
         requirement for office space is set out in the Business and Industry
35
     Comment number 4513.09
36
     Comment number 4558.53

                                             37
       Background Report. Concern was expressed about the size limits on out-of-
       City Centre locations originally proposed in the Preferred Option (size
       thresholds have not been included in the policy). Comments were also made
       on the need to support small businesses, create affordable business space
       and provide for the creative industries. These issues have been addressed
       through the City Policies.

       Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

3.45   The submitted policy will cater for the needs of existing and new office
       occupiers by providing a range of locations that are attractive to companies for
       a variety of reasons. The locations identified have their own advantages and
       together should ensure that the City Centre contributes fully to meeting the
       requirement for new office development set out in policy SB1 and is the focus
       for office provision for the City Region.

       Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)
3.46   The policy will be implemented by:

           The contribution of City Site allocations to the provision of office
            development, and the operation of the minimum requirements on
            development in the City Policies. The City Sites, City Policies and
            Proposals Map together will ensure that appropriate amounts of office
            development can be achieved in order to deliver the aims of the policy.

           Working closely with landowners and developers in the private sector as
            well as with regeneration and funding agencies such as Creative
            Sheffield and Yorkshire Forward, to ensure that sites can be developed in
            accordance with the policy.

           Using public funding to deliver sites if required.

           Using Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) to assemble the sites that
            would make up the areas.

           Ensuring that Action Plans for the relevant parts of the City Centre will be
            compatible with the policy and set out proposals for delivery clearly. The
            City Centre Masterplan and Economic Masterplan will also be
            compatible.

           Managing demand for other uses through partnership working and
            decisions about applications for planning permission.

3.47   The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
       policy SCC2. However, the target and indicators for policy SB3 are directly
       relevant and are set out in the Business and Industry Background Report.
       The target is:

           65% of new office floorspace developed in or at the edge of the City
            Centre
                                            38
       Progress against this target will be reported in the SDF Annual Monitoring
       Report (AMR).

       Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
3.48   The policy limits the freedom to developers to decide on the mixing of uses on
       individual sites, throughout the City Centre, but the benefits of a focused office
       areas will improve the overall supply of office uses in the City Centre. The
       precise limits will be set out in the City Policies document and the most
       appropriate balance and degree of flexibility will be further considered in that
       context.

3.49   There may be a risk that the concentration of offices in such Priority Office
       Areas could reduce demand for this type of business in other parts of the City
       Centre. But this will only be a serious problem if there is competition for office
       occupiers between sites within the City Centre. The requirement for offices
       indicated in policy SB1 will mean that land will need to be released in both
       priority and non-priority areas but the distinctive role of the priority areas will
       be to draw the ‘high-value’ businesses that need and are able to pay for
       locations in the priority areas. In the present market, evidence is that the
       overall, longer-term demand from occupiers for office buildings exists but the
       lack of sites for new development means that it is not being met by the
       provision of new buildings. It is considered that it would be possible to create
       the new office areas without having a significant adverse effect on existing
       office buildings in other parts of the City Centre.

3.50   The positive effects of this option are reliant on the transport infrastructure
       sustaining the level of journeys that will result from the anticipated increase in
       office provision in the City Centre. This issue will be considered in the context
       of policy SCC9, below.

       Conclusion
3.51   Policy SB3 in Part 2 of the Core Strategy sets out the reasons why the City
       Centre is the favoured location for offices in the City as a whole, and in the
       City Region and sub-Region. In order to achieve the aims of this policy, and
       to meet overall requirements for offices as set out in SB1, there needs to be a
       clear policy that guides office development within the City Centre to the most
       effective locations. Work on the City Centre Masterplan has identified
       particular opportunities and favoured locations. This submitted policy
       crystallises these into a clear strategy for office provision in the City Centre
       that will deliver a suitable amount of development, focussed in areas that are
       the most economically viable and sustainable, whilst also promoting
       appropriate mixing of uses and some dispersion of offices into other parts of
       the City Centre.




                                            39
40
4     SHOPPING IN THE CITY CENTRE
      Introduction
4.1   Many people who travel into Sheffield City Centre do so in order to shop. The
      City Centre is a major retail location within South Yorkshire, the City Region
      and even beyond. Shopping facilities also complement the other major
      functions of the City Centre such as employment and leisure and act together
      as a draw to create a vibrant and viable City Centre.

4.2   However, the City Centre from a shopping point of view is currently under-
      performing, and some of this is down to it being too geographically spread out.
      There is no strong, distinctive ‘heart’ to the city for shopping, which needs to
      be addressed if the City as a whole is to move forward and develop
      economically and socially. Building up an identifiable, core area to act as a
      focus, and allowing the relative role of the more peripheral areas to reduce,
      will address this problem.

4.3   The City Council is committed to creating a new heart and focus for shopping
      in the City Centre. Together with Creative Sheffield and developers
      Hammersons, it has been working towards the creation of the New Retail
      Quarter (NRQ), which will cover a significant part of the future Core Retail
      Area of the City Centre. This £600 million project is expected to begin
      construction in 2008. The New Retail Quarter will be a large retail-led mixed-
      use development, to be developed in the area shown on the Key Diagram and
      in detail on the Proposals Map, centred on land west of Pinstone Street
      broadly bounded by Rockingham Street, Division Street and Barkers Pool.
      The site lies in the middle of the Core Retail Area between Moorhead and
      Fargate and is therefore the best location for additional floorspace to link these
      two key parts of the city’s retail area. The NRQ is a mixed retail, housing and
      leisure scheme in the centre of the City's shopping area. It is the subject of an
      outline planning permission (05/03933/OUT). It has these elements:

             up to 98,500 sq m (gross area) of new retail floorspace (Class A1-A5)
             including a 25,000 sqm department store.
             cafes, bars and restaurants and a new public square;
             up to 232 residential units (Use Class C3).
             a nightclub and a health and fitness club (Class D2)
             off-street public car parking for 2,200 cars

4.4   But there are issues as to the role of the rest of the City Centre, such as the
      extent of the Core Retail Area outside of the NRQ, and what the retail role of
      other parts of the City Centre should be.

4.5   Retail uses are defined here as those in Use Classes A1-5, The policy focuses
      on ‘major non-food retail development’, which is defined as ‘increases in gross
      floorspace for shops (in Class A1 use) retailing non-food goods, of more than
      2,500 square metres’. The ‘Core Retail Area’ is as shown on the Key
      Diagram.


                                          41
      Policy SCC3 Shopping in the City Centre
      The focus of major new non-food retail development will be in the Core
      Retail Area, extending from Moorhead to the north end of Fargate. This
      area will be strengthened as the heart of a regional shopping centre by
      the development of the New Retail Quarter, a major comprehensive
      retail-led mixed-use development.

      Within and adjacent to the Core Retail Area development that might
      individually or cumulatively prejudice or delay the success of the
      regeneration of the Core Retail Area will not be permitted.

      In addition to the Core Retail Area, retail uses will also be required on the
      ground floor frontages of the following Shopping Streets at the
      approaches to the Core Retail Area:

         (a) The Moor (north of Fitzwilliam Gate)
         (b) High Street.

      More limited levels of new retail uses will be located on the ground floor
      frontages of Shopping Streets at the approaches to the Core Retail Area.

      The other Shopping Streets are:

         (c) Division Street and Devonshire Street
         (d) King Street
         (e) Angel Street
         (f) Haymarket
         (g) Arundel Gate between High Street and Norfolk Street
         (h) Surrey Street.

      On other streets leading into the Core Retail Area, small shops, food and
      drink outlets and services that would promote the vitality of the area will
      be acceptable on ground floor frontages.

      Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
      National Policy

4.6   The submitted policy promotes shopping provision in a focussed retail core
      area and particularly in a specific development, the NRQ. This is consistent
      with the Government objectives as set out in PPS6, paragraph 1.5, as it will
      enhance consumer choice and support efficient and competitive retailing and
      will improve accessibility to a good range of shops and be well-served by a
      choice of means of transport. Specifically, the policy will help to:

         “promote economic growth of regional, sub-regional and local economies,
         to deliver more sustainable patterns of development, ensuring that
         locations are fully exploited through high-density, mixed-use development”

      and to:

                                        42
          “provide a sense of place and a focus for the community and for civic
          activity and ensure that town centres provide an attractive, accessible and
          safe environment for businesses, shoppers and residents.”

4.7    Paragraph 2.41 of PPS6 requires development of 'main town centre uses' to
       be appropriately related to the size of the City Centre and catchment that it
       seeks to serve:

          “the aim should be to locate the appropriate type and scale of development
          in the right type of centre, to ensure that it fits into that centre and that it
          complements its role and function.”

4.8    The City Centre is uniquely placed to cater for the highest order of goods and
       services to meet the needs of the wider city region. But, the policy also
       recognises that locations outside the core area may be appropriate for
       smaller-scale development.

4.9    One of the objectives of PPG13 is to reduce the need to travel, especially by
       car. Paragraph 3 states that land use planning:

          “will help to reduce some of the need for car journeys (by reducing the
          physical separation of key land uses) and enable people to make
          sustainable transport choices.”

4.10   The NRQ and the Core Retail Area will be more accessible to residents of the
       City by public transport than alternative regional or sub-regional shopping
       destinations, so will accord with this objective.

       Regional Policy

4.11   The submitted policy, by seeking to consolidate the role of the City Centre as
       a focus of new and improved retailing, will help deliver the Core Approach of
       the draft Regional Spatial Strategy, which in Policy YH5 states:

          “Regional and Sub-Regional Centres will be the prime focus for …,
          shopping, [this] will be achieved through spatial planning and investment
          measures to … Strengthen the identity and roles of city/town centres as
          accessible and vibrant focal points for high trip generating uses”.

4.12   Policy YH8(A)(i) in the draft RSS seeks to:

          “Concentrate the majority of new development and redevelopment on the
          regional and sub-regional centres”.

4.13   In the same vein, policy E2 states that

          “City and town centres will be the main focus for … comparison shopping
          ….”

4.14   This is the clear emphasis of policy SCC3.

                                           43
4.15   It should be noted, however, that the Panel Report into the draft RSS has
       recommended that Part A of policy YH8 be deleted, as it repeats other
       policies, in this case the reference above in paragraph 4.11 above.

       Sub-Regional Policy

4.16   The submitted policy is entirely consistent with the South Yorkshire Spatial
       Strategy. Page 11 of the SYSS recognises that:

           “The vision will require: building on the potential of the city centre with …
           an expanded modern retail core”.

       Other Sheffield Policies

4.17   The City Centre Masterplan had four underlying strategic objectives. Work so
       far undertaken on the roll-forward of this plan suggests they remain as valid
       today as they did in 2000. One of these was create a vibrant City Centre for
       retailing. Research so far undertaken suggests that the City Centre still lags
       behind comparable cities like Newcastle and Nottingham, not least because
       the City Centre retail offer has yet to be refreshed, specifically with major
       schemes such as the NRQ and the Moor redevelopment. The City Centre is
       still not achieving its full potential in retail terms, and despite the progress
       towards delivery of the NRQ, the retail offer is not commensurate for a city of
       its size and there is a leakage of retail spending to Meadowhall and competing
       centres. There currently remains a lack of quality, diversity and capacity of
       retailing across the city centre core and consequently the ‘Meadowhall Effect’
       is still a factor to overcome. The expansion of the range and quality of
       shopping has been identified as one of the main priorities in consultation on
       the Masterplan review.

4.18   Extending the range and quality of shopping and supporting the development
       of the NRQ were both strongly supported in consultation on the revised
       Masterplan proposals that was undertaken with the Sheffield 100 Forum.37

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)

4.19   The 2005 City Strategy includes a commitment to completing the NRQ by
       2012 (page 39). The submitted policy builds on this commitment and
       enshrines it within planning policies. The 2007 update of the City Strategy
       notes the progress towards implementing the NRQ.




37
  Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Review and Roll-Forward – Sheffield 100 Workshop. EDAW
(2006)

                                              44
       Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
       6)

       Core Strategy Objectives

4.20   The policy supports many of the Core Strategy objectives:

          S1.1 Conditions created for a balanced, diverse and sustainable high-
           growth economy in the Sheffield city region;

          S2.1 The City Centre and complementary areas regenerated as the core
           location for major expansion of business, shopping, leisure and culture;

          S9.1 Development located to limit the distances people and goods need to
           travel, with mixing of land uses and increased opportunities for single
           journeys to serve several purposes;
          S9.2 High-density development focussed on the most accessible
           locations;

          S10.3 New development that generates significant trips carried out only in
           areas accessible by a choice of sustainable forms of transport;;

          S12.1 Previously developed land and existing buildings in urban areas
           reclaimed and re-used for all types of development, in preference to
           greenfield land.

          S4.11 for facilities to be accessible by all, including disabled people.

       Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

4.21   This policy is geographically very locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any
       neighbouring authorities will have policies that will impact significantly upon it.
       Rotherham’s Core Strategy Preferred Option PD4 sets out figures for retail
       floorspace that are not considered likely to have any significant impact on the
       submitted policy.

       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
4.22   The two options considered were to consolidate a smaller retail core around
       the NRQ, or to continue to support the existing, dispersed retail area.

       Option CC3a Consolidate the retail core by supporting the New Retail
       Quarter (NRQ) as the heart of a regional shopping centre within a
       reduced retail core area

4.23   This option would reduce the area classed as the Central Shopping Area in
       the Unitary Development Plan to a more compact, but hence more vibrant,
       core retail area. The UDP shopping area currently stretches from Moorfoot in
       the south to the Wicker Arches in the north, and west to Glossop Road. The
       distance from one end of this central shopping area to the other is over 1.5


                                            45
       kilometres. Few shoppers cover this sort of distance in one shopping trip, so
       different parts of the retail centre currently represent different destinations.

4.24   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) A more compact retail core would address the problem of the central
           shopping area being too ‘strung out’ and should attract more shoppers.

       (b) A more compact retail core area would be more viable and more attractive
           to shoppers. It is anticipated that more visits will be made and the retail
           turnover increased.

       (c) Other important City Centre uses can be located around and at the edge of
           the retail core, performing a complementary role. Having shops located
           next to each other, without other uses intervening improves attractiveness
           and viability.

       (d) A new focus for retailers will attract new occupiers and increase the range
           and value of the City Centre retail offer.

       (e) If all the major retail destinations are located close to one another, they can
           be accessed in a single trip.

       (f)     A new and improved retail core will help to meet the increasing need from
             rising numbers of City Centre residents, workers and visitors.

       (g) Introducing new uses into the current peripheral retail areas will help to
           rejuvenate them.

4.25   The weakness of this option is:

       (a) Some of the existing retail operations currently on the edge of the shopping
           area would become more isolated and less viable.

       Option CC3b Continue to support shopping development in the existing
       larger central shopping area

4.26   This option would include the NRQ but within the existing larger central
       shopping area. Planning powers would not be used to restrict the current
       extent of the retail core, and the market would decide where retail
       development takes place in the City Centre outside of the NRQ.

4.27   The main strengths of this option are:

       (a) Shops in the more peripheral areas of the City Centre that have a
           specialised function can have a distinct value and a role to play in the
           overall retail offer that the City Centre provides.

       (b) Some peripheral areas are important pedestrian gateways into the City
           Centre. Their vibrancy and interest would be maintained if there were
           retail offers and attractions along them.

                                            46
4.28   The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) It is possible that maintaining these peripheral areas could undermine the
           viability of the NRQ.

       (b) This option would not address the fact that the current retail area is spread
           out too far to be attractive as a regional centre.

       (c) Maintaining retail uses in peripheral areas will restrict opportunities for
           other key uses to become properly established in the City Centre. This
           could lead to a loss of the beneficial opportunities that this mixing of uses
           within the City Centre would create and reduce its vibrancy.

       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Planning Reasons
4.29   There is a qualitative need for a New Retail Quarter. The Supplementary
       Planning Guidance38 reports the structural failings of the City Centre:

          Its linearity - it extends 1.5 kilometres and contains two main parts, the
           Fargate / High Street / Haymarket area, and The Moor. A clear "mental
           map" of the centre is difficult to form. The elongated nature of the centre
           discourages shoppers since they have to choose which part of the centre
           to visit. The areas are linked at a weak point - Pinstone Street – where
           pedestrian flow is inhibited and where the shopping offer is poor. Shops
           there are smaller than in either Fargate or the Moor and have lower Zone A
           rateable values.

          The existing primary area (Fargate) is small, relative to the rest of the
           shopping area. It has only 33 shop units, many of which make inefficient
           use of floorspace and are not suited to modern retailing. There is no
           obvious way that the primary area can be extended by incremental
           development.

          Quality of shopping floorspace - there is a lack of large modern retail space
           in the primary area suitable for major retailers. and the quality of premises
           occupied by anchor stores, especially John Lewis, is poor. There is a lack
           of quality shopping, particularly of high price fashion and flagship stores.

          Facilities for shoppers are incomplete - weather protection for shoppers is
           limited and the shopping environment is poor, compared with centres of
           similar status. Car parking is dispersed, small scale, and poorly related to
           retail areas.

4.30   A New Retail Quarter would remedy these qualitative deficiencies. Located in
       the central part of the shopping area, it would draw the two main parts of the
       centre together and extend the primary area of Fargate.

38
  Sheffield City Centre: Supplementary Planning Guidance For The New Retail Quarter. Sheffield
City Council (July 2002)

                                               47
4.31   These are the advantages of a more concentrated Core Retail Area that is
       focussed on a major regeneration scheme that has been in the planning
       process for several years. This option is, therefore, heavily favoured, and the
       option to continue with the current shopping area as a focus would perpetuate
       some of the problems that the City Centre faces, highlighted particularly in
       work on the City Centre Masterplan. The NRQ has a development partner
       and outline planning permission has been granted. Enabling works are being
       undertaken, so there is a serious commitment to the provision of this new retail
       destination in the City Centre. Further investment and consolidation in other
       parts of the retail core are expected to follow from this.

4.32   Achieving the vision for a core city that enriches its region requires major
       improvements to the layout of the central shopping area and the range of
       shops. For the city as a whole to develop economically and socially, a Core
       Retail Area must be promoted as the focus for new development and this does
       mean that the main role of the more peripheral areas must change.

4.33   There has been serious under-investment in shopping opportunities in the City
       Centre in recent years and this has been in the context of policy that is more
       akin to the rejected option. Consolidation of the Core Retail Area will
       encourage new investment that will enable the City Centre to provide a real
       alternative shopping destination to other town and city centres and
       Meadowhall. This new focus is likely to attract new types of occupiers and
       increase the range and value of the City Centre retail offer.

4.34   Other important City Centre uses would locate near the retail core, performing
       a complementary role. For example, provision also needs to be made for
       other shops that do not significantly contribute to the city region function (e.g.
       for City Centre workers’ day-to-day needs). Office workers will use shops at
       lunchtime and visitors can combine shopping trips with leisure visits. New
       roles and uses have been identified for those areas that are no longer part of
       the core shopping area, such as Castlegate and Moorfoot (see policy SCC1).
       The expected demand for non-retail uses in the City Centre over the next few
       years provides an opportunity to re-invent the more peripheral City Centre
       shopping locations and develop new functions including housing, offices,
       leisure and community facilities.

4.35   Concentrating retail development in the Core Retail Area would be consistent
       with Core Strategy policy SS1. The Core Retail Area includes:

          Fargate,
          Pinstone Street,
          the top of the Moor, and
          the area to be occupied by the New Retail Quarter.

4.36   Fargate is included because it is already Sheffield's primary area. This is
       shown by its Zone A rateable values, which are higher than anywhere else in
       the City Centre (for details of rateable values, see the Core Strategy
       Background Report on Shopping). The other areas - Pinstone Street and the
       top of the Moor - are included in the Core Retail Area because they are in the

                                           48
       centre of the shopping area. Major development here will help consolidate the
       centre whereas major development at either end of the shopping area would
       perpetuate its linearity and the problems associated with that. They are also
       identified in the CWHB study,39 in paragraph 2.22, as a pivotal location
       between Fargate and the Moor. Major development here would link retail
       areas of the City that are currently poorly connected. Restricting out-of-centre
       non-food retailing is a necessary part of the submitted policy. Out-of-centre
       non-food retailing would take up capacity in the NRQ that would make it more
       difficult to achieve development in the Retail Core.

4.37   The submitted policy does recognise that an element of the rejected option is
       still appropriate. Some of the day-to-day needs identified above do not need
       to be met in the core area and some smaller and ‘lower-value’ outlets may
       require a different, though still accessible location. This is reflected in the
       complementary provisions of the policy for ‘Shopping Streets’ and other
       streets leading into the Core Area.

4.38   The various types of area in the submitted policy represent a hierarchy of retail
       locations within the City Centre, as set out below in Table 4.

       Table 4 – Hierarchy of City Centre Retail Locations and Appropriate
       Development

        Tier   Location              Type of development               Type of shop
         1   New Retail            Retail and leisure uses.      Promotion of major non-
             Quarter               85% of this floorspace to     food retail development.
                                   be used as shops.
          2    Rest of the         Retail and community          Other focus for major
               Core Retail         facilities (Class D1) at      non-food retail
               Area                street level frontage, but    development.
                                   any 100 metres of
                                   frontage to have at least
                                   85% in use as shops.
          3    Shopping            Any 100 metres of             No major non-food retail
               Streets: The        frontage to have at least     development.
               Moor and High       85% in use as shops.
               Street
          4    Other named         Any 100 metres of street      No major non-food retail
               Shopping            frontage to have at least     development.
               Streets             half in use as shops
          5    Other streets       Small retail acceptable       No major non-food retail
               leading into the                                  development.
               Core Retail
               Area

       Retail: Units in Planning Use Classes A1-A5
       Shops: Units in Planning Use Class A1


39
  City Wide Quantitative Study of Comparison Goods Retailing. Cushman Wakefield Healey Baker
(June 2002)

                                              49
4.39   Both this policy and policy SS1 aim to focus shopping in the Core Retail Area
       and the hierarchy of retail locations above reflects these aims. The table does
       not form part of policy SCC3 but it indicates how the twin aims of focusing
       major non food development in the Core Retail Area and of retaining a high
       proportion of shopping (A1) uses in the more central areas might be achieved
       when the policy SCC3 is translated into development control policies in the
       City Policies Document. The approach differs in some respects from the
       option that was consulted on in the City Policies Preferred Options but this is
       currently the subject of further work.

4.40   The column ‘Type of development’ requires explanation. The aim is to ensure
       a reasonably high proportion of shops in the Core Retail Area, since it is these
       that draw people from to a shopping centre and which provide daytime vitality.
       Non-A1 uses such as cafes will also enhance the City Centre’s vitality and,
       along with banks, provide a service to shoppers, but they are not likely to
       provide the necessary draw from a wide enough catchment to directly
       contribute to the policy’s aim of creating ‘the heart of a regional shopping
       centre’.

4.41   The levels of development in Table 4 are indicative at this stage. The figure of
       85% is derived from Condition 7 on the planning permission for the New Retail
       Quarter (05/03933/OUT). This requires 85% of its commercial floorspace to be
       used as shops (Class A1), so that it provides enough retail floorspace to form
       a regional shopping centre. It seems reasonable to apply this figure to
       frontage in the rest of the Core Retail Area since the New Retail Quarter is
       designed to be an extension of it. The existing units in Fargate have irregular
       amounts of floorspace over several floors, only a proportion of which can be
       used for sales. Using frontage as a measure would therefore be more
       appropriate than using areas.

4.42   Other areas of the City Centre outside the primary shopping area can provide
       space for the non-A1 uses that are necessary to provide services for shoppers
       and visitors to the Centre. Nevertheless requiring at least half of their frontage
       to be shops would ensure vitality during both the day and night.

4.43   The expansion of shopping and its concentration in a more compact area will
       have implications for the flow of traffic. Modelling work to date for the New
       Retail Quarter proposal suggests that this can be accommodated and
       additional short-stay parking is being provided in the City Centre accordingly.
       The proposed investment in short-stay parking in the City Centre reflects
       confidence in the predictions but flows will be monitored if there are any signs
       that capacity could be exceeded.

4.44   New premises in less peripheral areas are likely to have higher rental levels
       and not all of the retailers may be able to afford these rents, in which case
       their outlets would be lost to the City Centre. But a thriving retail core should
       be able to provide for many of the needs of retailers wishing to operate in the
       City Centre.

4.45   All the areas identified in the policy are entirely located in the Zone 1 Low
       Probability of flood risk (see paragraph 2.31).

                                           50
       Sustainability Appraisal

4.46   The policy scores well on economic sustainability criteria, as it is considered
       the better option to maximise the strength of Sheffield as a retail destination.
       A strong and accessible retail area will benefit the majority of the population.
       A more focussed, smaller retail core that is more accessible is far more
       sustainable than the retention of the current, spread out retail centre. A
       stronger retail core will lead to major new investment in the City Centre and
       many related regeneration benefits that will improve the City Centre economy
       and benefit the City and the City Region as a whole.

4.47   The policy could lead to training opportunities in the retail trade, as has
       happened at Meadowhall with the ‘Source’ building. A new shopping centre is
       likely to be safer and more secure and minimise the risk of crime. More
       shoppers in the City Centre will improve the demand for other cultural, leisure
       and recreation facilities that the City Centre is able to provide, thus helping to
       maintain their viability and help to ensure their provision for all.

4.48   The City Centre is the most accessible part of the City for the majority of
       Sheffield residents, so new retail development located here that generates
       additional visits would be the most efficient use of the transport network. The
       Core Retail Area is in a particularly accessible part of the City Centre and a
       new midi-interchange will be provided as part of the NRQ, further improving
       accessibility (see Policy SCC9). If all the major retail destinations are located
       close to one another, they can be accessed in a single trip, whereas if they are
       situated apart from each other at different ends of a strung out retail centre,
       they may require more than one journey. This situation would not represent
       an efficient use of transport facilities and it could be particularly difficult for
       those dependent on public transport. Creating a more compact Core Retail
       Area could reduce the number of shops in more peripheral parts of the City
       Centre, which could reduce accessibility for some. But, overall, the
       development of a more concentrated core area in the more accessible parts of
       the City Centre would benefit most shoppers. This is reflected in the
       sustainability appraisal regarding the efficient use of land and the transport
       network. Reducing trips by private vehicles results in reduced vehicle
       emissions and less air pollution.

4.49   Concentration makes more efficient use of existing land in the City Centre and
       frees up peripheral sites for other development. A new concentrated retail
       centre and the new investment that this will bring can improve the built
       environment of the City Centre. Concentrating the retail core into a smaller
       area may make more efficient use of the physical infrastructure, as is currently
       happening with the provision of improved services in advance of construction
       of the NRQ.

       Equality Appraisal

4.50   There are significant equality benefits of the submitted policy. In particular, a
       new retail development is likely to be much more accessible for people with
       disabilities, compared with the existing centre, that is strung out and populated

                                           51
         with old buildings. A more concentrated retail core would make better use of
         the existing public transport network, which will benefit those who rely on
         public transport due to limited access to private vehicles, including those on
         low incomes. A new, compact and more enclosed shopping area will be more
         useable for physically frail or vulnerable people and their carers and
         dependent children and their carers. The loss of some peripheral parts of the
         retail core that are currently more accessible to residents on that side of the
         City Centre, could be a negative impact. But the policy will improve
         accessibility overall, and other residents will benefit from the concentration of
         the retail office in a more compact and accessible part of the City Centre.

         Consultation Responses

4.51     This submitted policy is derived from the emerging option CC3a (see
         paragraph 4.23 above), which was Preferred Option PCC2.

4.52     The policy was favoured by nearly all of the respondents at the Emerging
         Options stage, including stakeholders such as Sheffield One (now part of
         Creative Sheffield) and Yorkshire Forward.

4.53     Yorkshire Forward’s comment was:

             “There is significant commitment to the NRQ which should significantly
             improve the retail offer of Sheffield City Centre. This should in turn
             improve the city’s attractiveness for new occupiers, and increase the
             viability of the City Centre retail offer. In the transitional period some
             existing retail operations on the edge of the shopping area could become
             more isolated and less viable but the city will gain in the longer term from a
             more focussed and attractive retail core..”40

4.54     It is considered that the consultation responses to the emerging option
         strongly support the submitted policy.

4.55     There was a mixture of support and objections to the Preferred Option.
         Concerns were expressed, for example, about the omission of the Markets
         from the policy and provision for specialist and small-scale retaining. But the
         Markets are part of the Moor redevelopment that is more centrally located, and
         it is anticipated that the Shopping Streets will be a suitable location foe
         specialist shops, which will also still be able to locate in other parts of the City
         Centre. There was support for the principle of consolidation of retail into a
         more compact core area.

         Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

4.56     There is clear evidence that a more compact retail area, focussed around the
         NRQ, will benefit the City Centre, which, in turn, benefits the City as a whole.
         There is clear support for this approach in other strategies and consultation
         responses. However, there is a need to accurately define the relative roles of
         other parts of the City Centre in retail terms. The submitted policy sets this

40
     Comment Number 4558.43

                                              52
       out, and it is further explained in Table 4 above, which makes it clear what
       types and levels of retail development are appropriate in the various parts of
       the City Centre.

       Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)
4.57   The policy will be implemented by:

          Developing the NRQ, which has a development partner, outline planning
           permission and enabling works underway, as the focus of the Core Retail
           Area.

          Further investment and consolidation of the other key retail areas,
           particularly the Core Retail Area and Shopping Streets, such as The Moor.

          Promotion through City Centre Action Plans and Masterplans of the
           identified retail areas.

          Determining planning applications in line with the hierarchy of locations set
           out in the policy.

4.58   The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
       policy SCC3. However, the target and indicators for policy SS1 are directly
       relevant (see Retail and Built Leisure Background Report). The target is:

          98,500 square metres (gross area) of new retail (Class A) floorspace in the
           Core Retail Area of the City Centre

       Progress against the target will be reported in the SDF Annual Monitoring
       Report (AMR).

       Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
4.59   There could be a risk of creating excessive capacity in the City Centre by
       having a strong retail core and significant additional areas that could prejudice
       the NRQ or lead to decline in other areas. But the hierarchy approach of the
       policy should ensure that the relative scale of development is appropriate to
       support the priority locations.

       Conclusion
4.60   Previous policy approaches to retail in the City Centre have not helped to
       revitalise the City Centre and enable it to effectively compete with other
       centres, including Meadowhall. There needs to be a new focus in the City
       Centre and a more compact retail heart created. The submitted policy will
       achieve this, by focussing development in and around the NRQ, which will be
       the major catalyst for the rejuvenation of the City Centre as a retail destination.
       The policy will create more clarity as to the relative roles of the rest of the City
       Centre. A hierarchy of retail locations is proposed, which will enable a
       sequential approach to retail development to be clearly delivered, in


                                            53
accordance with national policy. Further detail on how this will be achieved
will be taken up in the City Policies document.




                                   54
5     CULTURAL FACILITIES IN THE CITY CENTRE
       Introduction
5.1    This is an issue that was not included in the Emerging or Preferred Options
       stage, but a need for a specific policy to promote and protect the cultural role
       of the City Centre was suggested as part of consultation on the Preferred
       Options.41 Such an approach would be consistent with other strategies, that
       identify culture and leisure as important functions of city centres.

5.2    Arts and cultural facilities include uses such as galleries, museums, libraries,
       theatres, concert halls, cinemas, heritage centres and exhibition rooms. The
       ‘Cultural Hub’ is– the focus of cultural uses in the City Centre, as shown on the
       Key Diagram.

       Policy SCC4 Cultural Facilities in the City Centre
       The retention of arts and cultural facilities will be supported and new
       uses that relate to cultural activity will be encouraged, particularly in the
       Cultural Hub area around Tudor Square.

       Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
       National Policy

5.3    The Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism42 emphasises the
       importance of cultural facilities in helping to attract events and secure tourist
       spending that will boost the local economy. In paragraph 2.5 it says:

           “The revenue generated by tourism can help to support a broader and
           more vibrant and active community by attracting arts, sports or cultural
           events”

5.4    This is an integral part of the spatial strategy as it relates to the City Centre.

5.5    The Government’s Northern Way initiative43 emphasised the importance of
       culture to a City’s economy:

           “competition to select the UK’s nomination for European Capital of Culture
           2008 demonstrated the importance of culture and creativity to the lives of
           our cities.”

5.6    This document, on page 48, specifically recognises the importance of the
       recent improvements in the Heart of the City in terms of improving the cultural
       offer of the City and:


41
   Comment number 4524.002
42
   Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism. Department for Communities and Local
Government: London (May 2006 reprinted July 2006)
43
   Making It Happen: The Northern Way ODPM (February 2004)

                                              55
          “has become a symbol of Sheffield’s economic and cultural rejuvenation.”

5.7    This highlights the economic importance of the cultural facilities in the City
       Centre to the City’s overall economic performance and, therefore, the
       justification for promoting cultural facilities through the Core Strategy.

       Regional Policy

5.8    Cultural activity and facilities feature in various regional policies and it is only
       appropriate, given Sheffield’s role in its city region, to reflect these in the Core
       Strategy.

5.9    Paragraph 1.53 of the Regional Economic Strategy promotes cultural facilities
       as an important part of creating a ‘quality of place’ as an underpinning driver of
       regional economic performance:

          “The term ‘quality of place’ sums up all those factors that make an area –
          whether that be a town, city or region – an attractive place to live;
          incorporating quality of life factors such as culture”

5.10   Paragraph 2.14 identifies the need to address the importance of culture and
       raising aspirations, and one of the aims of the RES in paragraph 2.3 is:

          “Utilising the full potential of Yorkshire and Humber’s physical and cultural
          assets”

5.11   This is further recognised in the in RES in paragraph 3.113:

          “The Key Cities work (undertaken in a partnership approach by Bradford,
          Hull, Leeds, Sheffield and York) demonstrated the fundamental importance
          of collaboration which reflects distinctive assets – such as … cultural offer.”

5.12   The policy supports Objective 6E of the RES, as set out on page 92, to use
       culture to contribute to the economy, renaissance and profile and making the
       most of distinctive local assets.

5.13   The submitted policy is also consistent with policy E2 A of the draft Regional
       Spatial Strategy, which states that:

          “The role and performance of existing city and town centres will be
          strengthened. City and town centres will be the main focus for … cultural,
          … services … which generate a high level of people movements. These
          uses should not be located outside of these centres … “

5.14   Creating a focussed area for these cultural facilities will enhance their viability
       and help to meet the requirements of the RSS policy.

5.15   This is also taken up in Policy E6 B iii:

          “Local Development Documents should set out policies and proposals that
          place particular priority on tourism related development that … Realise[s]

                                            56
             the potential of the heritage and cultural assets of … urban areas by
             promoting their roles as modern, varied and colourful destinations of
             choice”

5.16      The wider issue of promoting tourism is covered in the City Policies document,
          but the cultural element is supported by the submitted spatial policy. Creating
          a cultural hub will help to create a destination, that will help deliver the aims of
          the RSS and RES policies. The Panel Report has not suggested any
          fundamental changes to the wording of these policies.

          Sub-Regional Policy

5.17      Page 11 of the South Yorkshire Spatial Strategy recognises that:

             “The vision will require: building on the potential of the city centre with … a
             vibrant cultural … offer and high-quality buildings and spaces”.

5.18      The submitted policy will help to deliver this by focussing cultural uses in an
          established area that already has good quality buildings in place.
          Improvements to the Crucible Theatre are also currently underway.

5.19      The Sheffield City Region Development Programme (CRDP),44 on page 25,
          also emphasises the economic importance of promoting culture:

             “In a wider sense, the cultural industries and culture in general will play a
             vital role in the regeneration and transformation of the City Region. This
             role for culture is recognised in the European Commission’s recent
             guidance on cohesion policy and cities which identifies the importance of a
             vibrant culture in attracting citizens, businesses, workers and visitors.
             Many of the regeneration projects already underway across the City
             Region are using culture to transform the key centres”

          Other Sheffield Policies

5.20      The Sheffield Tourism Strategy acknowledges the importance of the cultural
          offer in attracting leisure visitors (page 5) and Sheffield is a regional
          destination for culture (page 8). The strategy for culture reflects the Regional
          Economic Strategy aims (page 10):

             “Sustaining tourism through environmental and cultural quality and
             opportunity, and ensuring access”

5.21      On Page 11 it reiterates the Sheffield First Partnership objectives for the city,
          that include a good cultural offer. Page 22 sets out the growing importance of
          cultural tourism. It notes:

             “The diversity of the cultural resource in Sheffield means that the focused
             development of existing products in conjunction with sophisticated


44
     Sheffield City Region Development Programme. The Northern Way (September 2006)

                                               57
           marketing techniques can potentially generate a number of similar positive
           impacts.”

5.22   The submitted policy will help to deliver the tourism benefits described by
       promoting a focussed cultural hub within an accessible part of the City Centre
       that can be effectively marketed.

5.23   The Creative Sheffield Prospectus45 on page 6, recognises the importance of
       culture ensuring that the City Region role of the City is delivered in full:

           “Cities boost Regions by providing a concentration of culture, leisure and
           sport”

5.24   The original City Centre Masterplan highlighted the provision of cultural
       facilities as a priority. The 2000 Masterplan proposed the creation of a lively
       mixed use area / destination in Tudor Square. Work on the roll-forward of the
       Masterplan has suggested the culture is still as important now as it was at the
       time of the original Masterplan.

5.25   The policy is supported by consultation on the Masterplan review, that has
       highlighted the provision of leisure, cultural and entertainment facilities as a
       priority. It was recognised that the cultural offer is largely concentrated in one
       area around Tudor Square and more could be made of this area to enhance
       its attraction. A key issue was the need to create a ‘destination city’ with a
       broad range of high quality cultural, retail and visitor facilities to make the City
       Centre the destination of choice for residents and visitors. The most
       successful drivers to increase market demand in the city centre will come from
       a growth in the visitor economy based on an event strategy and a clearly
       differentiated cultural offer.

5.26   Consultation on the emerging Masterplan with the Sheffield 100 Forum46
       showed support for proposals that are in line with the submitted policy.
       Specifically, there was support for an enlarged cultural quarter around Tudor
       Square.

5.27   The submitted policy will help to deliver these priorities identified in the City
       Centre Masterplan work.

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)
5.28   As part of the Strong Economy theme, the 2007 City Strategy seeks to:

           “Raise Sheffield’s position as a city of cultural significance”




45
   Creative Sheffield – Prospectus For A Distinctive European City In A Prosperous Region. Creative
Sheffield (2006)
46
   Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Review and Roll-Forward – Sheffield 100 Workshop. EDAW
(2006)

                                                58
5.29    The creation of a strong cultural destination within the City Centre will be a key
        element in achieving this aim. Delivery through the Cultural Strategy is
        identified. The Sheffield Cultural Strategy,47 in the Foreword, states:

            “Cultural activities are increasingly important to Sheffield’s fast changing,
            diverse and cosmopolitan society. They are vital ingredients in the life of
            our creative city and the region and play a fundamental part in enhancing
            the civic pride and the daily life of individuals and communities. Significant
            changes in the city provide a powerful driver for a renewed vision for the
            sector, which firmly places Sheffield at the heart of the region, and culture
            at the heart of the city’s rejuvenation. … Sheffield believes that culture has
            now an even bigger part to play in the success of the city and by working
            together in partnership we will ensure that we achieve excellence.”

        Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
        6)

        Core Strategy Objectives

5.30    Promotion of the City Centre for cultural use supports the Core Strategy
        objectives, specifically those that promote culture and tourism and focus
        development on accessible locations, as follows:

           S1.6 Cultural and leisure facilities and tourism expanded and improved;

           S2.1 The City Centre and complementary areas regenerated as the core
            location for major expansion of business, shopping, leisure and culture;

           S9.1 Development located to limit the distances people and goods need to
            travel, with mixing of land uses and increased opportunities for single
            journeys to serve several purposes;

           S10.3 New development that generates significant trips carried out only in
            areas accessible by a choice of sustainable forms of transport.

        Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

5.31    This policy is locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any neighbouring
        authorities will have policies that will impact upon it. Rotherham’s Core
        Strategy seeks to focus cultural facilities in their town centre, so the general
        approach is consistent, although it makes no reference to Sheffield’s City
        Centre The other neighbouring local authorities have yet to produce
        development plan documents that can be considered alongside this policy for
        compatibility.




47
 Sheffield Culture - A Strategy for Inclusive Cultural and Sporting Development. Sheffield City
Council (January 2006)

                                                 59
       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
5.32   The policy was introduced as a result of comments on the Preferred Options,
       so no other options were considered. However, the alternative would be to
       have no specific policy to promote and protect cultural facilities. It was
       introduced in the Additional Options document as Option ACC1.

       Option: The retention of arts and cultural facilities will be supported and
       new uses that relate to cultural activity will be encouraged, particularly
       in the Cultural Hub area around Tudor Square.

5.33   The strength of this option is:

       (a) Theatres, centres for the arts and other cultural facilities are an important
           core city contribution to the life of the city region. The existing cluster in
           and around the Tudor Square/ Millennium Square area creates an identity
           and makes for a strong destination. Visitors are more likely to use the full
           range of facilities if they are situated in a unique location.

5.34   The weakness of this option is:

       (a) Cultural facilities proposed in other parts of the City Centre could be
           discouraged, although the policy would not prohibit this.

       Option: No specific promotion of cultural facilities in any part of the City
       Centre.

5.35   The strength of this option is:

       (a) New cultural facilities can develop in any part of the City Centre if a
           developer proposes them, without any strategic requirement to focus such
           a use in a particular location.

5.36   The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) The clustering advantages set out in paragraph 5.33 above may not be
           achieved if cultural uses develop in a sporadic way.

       (b) The current destination value of existing facilities centred around the Tudor
           Square/ Millennium Square area could be lost if they are not specifically
           promoted.

       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Planning Reasons

5.37   The need to focus cultural uses in the City Centre is supported by national and
       regional policies. Their specialised nature, coupled with the quarters
       approach adopted (Policy SCC1) means that is sensible to focus them within a
       particular part of the City Centre, that is already well established for such uses.


                                           60
5.38   Sheffield has a cluster of performance arts centres and civic buildings focused
       on Tudor Square. The theatres here represent a key regional cultural
       resource. These and other facilities in the City Centre should be supported
       and enhanced.

5.39   These facilities are an important core city contribution to the life of the city
       region. The existing cluster in and around the Tudor Square/ Millennium
       Square area gives a sense of area identity and they benefit from the linkages
       between them.

5.40   The spatial strategy of the Core Strategy states that the City Centre will be the
       focus for most leisure and culture services (paragraph 4.8). Theatres, arts and
       other cultural facilities are recognised as important anchors in the City Centre
       and give it a sense of local identity and vitality. They benefit residents,
       workers and shoppers and attract visitors to the City.

5.41   There is a consistency also with Policy SCC1(a), that identifies the Heart of
       the City, which contains the Cultural Hub, as a focus for civic, arts and cultural
       buildings.

5.42   The area identified is already established and existing facilities are expected
       to remain. This will make it easier to support the area by resisting new
       development that does not improve the cultural offer, and directing new
       cultural development towards the Cultural Hub

5.43   There are no flood risk implications as the hub area is all within Zone 1 Low
       Probability (see paragraph 2.31).

       Sustainability Appraisal

5.44   The submitted policy is more sustainable than the alternative option to have
       no specific policy promoting cultural provision in the City Centre. Encouraging
       arts and cultural facilities is likely to help support economic growth in the City
       Centre, as the City will be seen as an attractive and vibrant place to do
       business, encouraging job creation. The policy will lead to increased cultural
       provision, particularly in the City Centre, and will safeguard existing provision.
       The City Centre is highly accessible by sustainable modes of transport and
       supporting / encouraging provision of cultural facilities in the City Centre would
       enable people to access these facilities easily. Creating and maintaining a
       specific area devoted to cultural provision is more sustainable, as the facilities
       will benefit from being in a known area that will create a destination and
       enable linked visits. The location is extremely accessible by public transport.

       Equality Appraisal

5.45   Cultural facilities in the City Centre will be easily accessible by range of public
       transport facilities, that is likely to particular benefit those on low incomes. The
       proposed hub is well situated on Arundel Gate, which takes a large number of
       routes and has its own midi-interchange. It is also easily accessible from the
       railway station and Interchange.


                                            61
          Consultation Responses

5.46      This submitted policy is a new issue that was presented as an Additional
          Option, in response to comments made at the Preferred Options stage.
          Specifically, Yorkshire Forward48 stated that more emphasis on locating major
          leisure and cultural development in the City Centre was required, and the
          Theatres Trust49 expressed a view that the need for cultural provision should
          be made clear.

5.47      There was unanimous support for the option when it was introduced as the
          Additional Option, ACC1, including from Yorkshire Forward (recognising the
          compatibility with the Regional Economic Strategy, particularly Objective 6E),
          the Theatres Trust and Sport England.

          Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

5.48      Consultations on the Preferred Options and recommendations in other
          strategies identified the importance of cultural facilities for the City and the
          need to focus within the City Centre in a concentrated location. Clustering of
          the most important facilities in single locations creates benefits for the uses by
          creating a major destination.

          Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)
5.49      The policy will be implemented by:

             Supporting the Cultural Hub through improvements to the facilities
              themselves and to the quality of design of buildings and spaces. Much has
              already been achieved in the Heart of the City and elsewhere and this
              progress will be maintained through the plan period. This will be done by
              existing operators, including the City Council, the Theatres Trust and
              central government. As the Cultural Strategy says on page 2:

                 “Culture thrives on collaboration and partnership with a wide range of
                 national and regional agencies, voluntary and community groups,
                 successful businesses and independent practitioners and producers.
                 Sheffield prides itself on possessing an outstanding range of cultural
                 trusts and organisations, demonstrating entrepreneurship and
                 innovation.”

             New developments that will threaten the retention of arts and cultural
              facilities in the area will be resisted by refusing planning permission for
              developments that would reduce the cultural provision in the area.

5.50      The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
          policy SCC4. However, the target and indicators for policy SS4 are directly
          relevant in that the City Centre is one of the locations for leisure and cultural


48
     Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy Preferred Options comment number 4558.016
49
     Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy Preferred Options comment number 4524.001

                                                62
       facilities specifically named in the policy (see Retail and Built Leisure
       Background Report). The target is:

          95% of major new leisure floorspace in named locations

       Progress against the target will be reported in the SDF Annual Monitoring
       Report (AMR).

       Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
5.51   The policy includes a measure of flexibility by not precluding cultural facilities
       outside the Cultural Hub. There are no risks associated with the outcome of
       the policy though it remains to be seen how much activity can be concentrated
       in the preferred area.

       Conclusion
5.52   The provision of cultural facilities is recognised in national and regional
       planning policies as an important function of major centres. Sheffield already
       possesses a high quality cultural destination in the heart of its City Centre, a
       major asset that adds to the economic value of the City as a whole, so needs
       to be encouraged and protected.

5.53   The Core Strategy needs to support this function if the City Centre is to
       continue to develop its sub-regional and City Region roles and to operate
       effectively as a Core City.




                                           63
64
6        THE UNIVERSITIES

          Introduction
6.1       This is an issue that was not included in the Emerging Options but was
          introduced in the Preferred Options, as a result of comments submitted50 (see
          paragraph 6.39 below), that emphasised the important role of the two
          universities in ensuring the diversity and vibrancy of the City Centre.


6.2       Sheffield Hallam University and the University of Sheffield play a crucial role in
          the economic, cultural and social value of the City Centre, in particular, and
          the city and City Region as a whole. In terms of the economic role, the
          universities are excellent assets that help drive the knowledge economy, being
          located right in the City Centre.

          Policy SCC5 The Universities
          Provision will be made for the two universities to consolidate and
          expand their teaching and research operations within and adjacent to
          their existing campus areas.

          Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)

          National Policy

6.3       PPS1 promotes policies that will achieve sustainable development.
          Specifically, in paragraph 16, states that:

             “Plan policies should address accessibility (both in terms of location and
             physical access) for all members of the community to … education”

6.4       The submitted policy will assist in this, by promoting university development in
          the City Centre. Paragraph 23 also promotes this:

             “Ensure that suitable locations are available for public sector (e.g. health
             and education) … so that the economy can prosper”

6.5       Paragraph 27 re-iterates this approach:

             “In preparing development plans, planning authorities should seek to …
             provide improved access for … education … by ensuring that new
             development is located where everyone can access services or facilities on
             foot, bicycle or public transport rather than having to rely on access by car”

6.6       The submitted policy is considered sound, in that it should be capable of
          delivering these aims of national planning policy.


50
     Comment numbers 4513.05 and 4973.08

                                              65
       Regional Policy

6.7    The policy will assist in achieving the aims of the Regional Economic Strategy
       (RES). The Executive Summary of the RES emphasises the important
       business roles of our universities:

           “The region will help businesses find new markets and innovate in new
           products and processes, encouraging more businesses to collaborate with
           our excellent universities and other higher education institutions to exploit
           the region’s science and research base”.

6.8    The universities are also identified as physical development priorities in the
       RES (page102), and page 11 states that developers are being attracted to the
       City on the back of assets such as the universities.

6.9    The RES in paragraph 3.113 recognises the importance of the universities in
       terms of their economic value:

           “The Key Cities work (undertaken in a partnership approach by Bradford,
           Hull, Leeds, Sheffield and York) demonstrated the fundamental importance
           of collaboration which reflects distinctive assets – such as universities”

6.10   This role is also recognised in the draft Regional Spatial Strategy (page 169):

           “The Regional Economic Strategy places great emphasis on developing
           links between business and the regions universities to support these aims.
           Though knowledge based resources may be dispersed around the Region,
           there are significant economic advantages to promoting the ‘critical mass’
           of activity provided by attractive, multi-functional city and town centres.”

6.11   The submitted policy helps to support these economic by aims by enabling the
       growth and consolidation of the universities within Sheffield City Centre.

       Sub-Regional Policy

6.12   Page 11 of the South Yorkshire Spatial Strategy (SYSS) recognises that::

           “The vision will require: … harnessing the strength of the universities by
           translating high-level knowledge into market-leading economic
           applications, using local research to attract international business and
           retaining increasing numbers of graduates developing careers in the city.”

6.13   The submitted policy will encourage the universities to continue to grow and
       develop, which will help to achieve this aim of the SYSS.

       Other Sheffield Policies

6.14   The Creative Sheffield Prospectus51 on page 5, recognises the importance of
       the universities to the City Region:
51
  Creative Sheffield – Prospectus For A Distinctive European City In A Prosperous Region. Creative
Sheffield (2006)

                                                66
           “Cities boost Regions by providing a critical mass of public and private
           knowledge institutions”

6.15   The policy is supported by work being undertaken on the roll-forward of the
       City Centre Masterplan. The four underlying strategic objectives from the
       original Masterplan are considered to be still valid. They include building a
       new high technology based economy in the City and creating a vibrant city as
       a centre for learning.

6.16   A challenge identified is to unlock more of the intellectual property and
       expertise in the universities and to encourage more commercialisation which
       will stimulate new technology based firm formation and growth. The Economic
       Masterplan is expected to promote a high level commitment from both
       universities to the transformation of the city economy and strengthening of
       links between the universities and business. Success is dependent on them
       improving their physical infrastructure to match that of their competitors. The
       submitted policy also encourages the universities to develop in this way.

6.17   Sheffield’s universities are identified as irreplaceable assets, providing a broad
       range of benefits, as major employers, through their own and students
       spending power, and their international, national and local work with
       businesses and other research centres. Both universities provide local
       business with access to the high quality expertise.

6.18   Work on the roll-forward of the City Centre Masterplan places great emphasis
       on the importance of the universities in their central location. Having two
       universities in such dominant City Centre locations sets Sheffield apart from
       many of its competitor cities and arguably the universities are the city’s most
       important economic asset. The contribution the universities make to the
       economy of the city region is huge, as borne out by the following statistics:

          In 2005/06, the University of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam University had
           a combined annual income of £475m.

          Together, both universities directly employ 7,819 full time equivalents.
           More than 3,400 are academic staff whilst 4,381 are non-academics
           reflecting the wide range of other employment provided by the Universities.

          This direct employment creates a further 3,387 indirect jobs within the
           region – the total employment impact of the two universities is therefore
           11,206.

          The two universities create an annual direct output of £451m. This creates
           an additional £308m in the wider region taking account of multipliers.

6.19   The physical presence of the universities is also an important economic driver,
       generating increased footfall through the significant numbers of student, staff
       and visitors and create a vibrancy and sense of place that increases
       investment potential and draw of the City Centre.


                                           67
6.20   Initial Masterplan proposals suggest that the two universities work in
       partnership in order to enhance their respective campus environments and
       public realm and look to maximise physical links with the City Centre.

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)
6.21   The 2007 City Strategy on page 43 refers to consultation with residents who:

           “were keen to see the strengths of our two universities being utilised to
           engender a learning culture across the city.”

6.22   The policy encourages the universities to capitalise on their central locations,
       which will help to build on their existing strengths.

       Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
       6)

       Core Strategy Objectives

6.23   The policy will help deliver a number of objectives, particularly those that
       focussing high trip generating uses in accessible locations and promoting the
       development of the knowledge economy

          S1.1 Conditions created for a balanced, diverse and sustainable high-
           growth economy in the Sheffield city region

          S1.2 Provision for modern and high-technology manufacturing and
           knowledge-based services, including links with the universities and
           opportunities for the creation of dynamic business clusters

          S1.5 Land provided for education and training facilities for developing a
           skilled workforce

          S9.1 Development located to limit the distances people and goods need to
           travel, with mixing of land uses and increased opportunities for single
           journeys to serve several purposes

          S9.2 High-density development focussed on the most accessible
           locations.

          S10.3     New development that generates significant trips carried out only
           in areas accessible by a choice of sustainable forms of transport.

       Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

6.24   This policy is locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any neighbouring
       authorities will have policies that will impact upon it. Rotherham’s Core
       Strategy makes no reference to Sheffield’s universities. The other
       neighbouring local authorities have yet to produce development plan
       documents that can be considered alongside this policy for compatibility.

                                           68
       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
6.25   As the issue was introduced at the Preferred Options stage, no alternative
       options were specifically suggested. However, the de facto alternative option
       would be to allow or encourage university and related uses to disperse beyond
       the area around them.

       Option: Provision will be made for the two universities to consolidate
       and expand their teaching and research operations within their existing
       areas.

6.26   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) The two universities attract large numbers of students, workers and other
           visitors. Encouraging them to consolidate and expand in their central
           locations would be highly sustainable and also add to the diversity and
           vibrancy of the City Centre.

       (b) Their expansion could further contribute to the City Strategy ambition for
           learning to be a part of everyone’s way of life.

       (c) Continuing close links with innovative businesses will assist economic
           transformation.

6.27   The weakness of this option is:

       (a) It could discourage university and related development elsewhere in the
           City, that could stifle further development.

       Option: Allow or encourage dispersal of university developments
       beyond in their existing areas.

6.28   The strength of this option is:

       (a) The universities would have a greater degree of flexibility in their
           development decisions.

6.29   The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) The significant presence of the universities in the City Centre could be
           eroded if they are not encouraged to consolidate within the central area.
           The positive aspects of their central locations referred to in this chapter .

       (b) The option could encourage the universities to consider new out-of-centre
           campus developments that would not be as accessible or sustainable as
           the present City Centre locations.




                                            69
       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Planning Reasons

6.30   The second option, for possible dispersal of university uses was rejected, as it
       would not deliver the economic, training and accessibility benefits referred to
       in 6.26 above.

6.31   The character of the City Centre (and the City as a whole) owes much to the
       presence of the universities, and the importance of the academic sector is
       likely to increase as student numbers remain high and the universities
       continue to forge close links with innovative businesses. They have tended to
       concentrate and expand their activities in their main City Centre campuses
       and this is to be encouraged, as the City Centre is a sustainable and
       accessible location for such uses that generate so many trips by students,
       employees and visitors.

6.32   The focus of much of the economic regeneration for Sheffield is in the growth
       sectors of innovation and research. The universities are pivotal in delivering
       this economic growth, and the SDF needs to create planning policies and
       strategies that encourage the physical development of these important
       institutions in the central locations that they currently occupy.

6.33   The universities can act as major drivers of enterprise within the City. The
       business start-up and growth potential of the universities should be planned
       for.

6.34   The universities are well established and are consistently listed as having a
       high demand for places from prospective students. They have both
       undergone significant expansion and development recently, much of this in the
       City Centre, as highlighted in Table 5 below. This shows that there has been
       over £80 million of physical development since 1993, that has provided over
       22,000 square metres of new floorspace.

       Table 5 – Major Development Schemes Undertaken by Sheffield Hallam
       University and the University of Sheffield in Sheffield City Centre, 1993
       to 2007
                                                                            Gross
                                                   Year        Value
          Location           Description                                 Floorspace
                                                 Completed     (£m)
                                                                           (sq. m.)
        University of Sheffield
        Portobello,     Student
        Regent Street   accommodation,
                                                    1993        11.9        9,500
        / Mappin        library, bookshop
        Street
        Broad Lane      Student flats.
                                                    1993         2.8        1,500
        Court
        St. George's    Student
                                                    1994          1           0
        Church, off     accommodation and

                                            70
                                                                                    Gross
                                                        Year          Value
           Location             Description                                      Floorspace
                                                      Completed       (£m)
                                                                                   (sq. m.)
        Broad Lane        lecture theatre.
        Glossop           University health
        Road / Gell       centre and                      2005           3          2,398
        Street            pharmacy.
        Jessop            Bio-incubator
        Building,         laboratory and office           2005          6.9         3,100
        Brook Hill        block.
        Leavygreave       Social Sciences
        Road /            building.                       2006          5.5         3,290
        Victoria St
        Sheffield Hallam University
        Pond Street       Central atrium,
        Expansion,        bookshop, lecture               1993          28               0
        Phase One         theatre.
        'Adsetts          Lecture theatre,
        Centre', Pond     library and teaching.           1996          14               0
        Street
        'Stoddart         Business and
                                                          1997          10           674
        Building',        Technology Centre
        'Hallam           Improvements to
        Square',          existing main                   1998           1          1,859
        Howard St         entrance
                                                                        53          2,533
       Source: Sheffield City Council Major Development Schemes in Sheffield database.

6.35   The universities are continuing to develop research links with local companies,
       and this is identified as a priority in economic strategies. It is considered likely
       that the universities can continue to consolidate and expand and the policy to
       promote this is based on robust assumptions of future scenarios.

6.36   In terms of flood-risk, (see paragraph 2.31), the University of Sheffield is
       situated within Zone 1 Low Probability. Sheffield Hallam University’s City
       Campus is partially situated within Zone 3a High Probability. Universities are
       classed as ‘more vulnerable’, according to the Flood Risk Vulnerability
       Classification in This means that consolidation and expansion of Sheffield
       Hallam University will require consideration of flood risk in selecting sites for
       development within and adjacent to its existing campus area.

       Sustainability Appraisal

6.37   The sustainability appraisal of this preferred option showed that this approach
       was more sustainable than making no specific provision for the continuing
       development of the universities in their existing areas. Both universities are
       mainly concentrated in the City Centre, so their consolidation and expansion
       within their central locations will help to reduce the need for travel by students,
       workers and visitors and redevelopment at the central campuses will improve
       accessibility to new development associated with the universities. It is a more

                                              71
       efficient use of land to locate university and related uses close together and
       encouraging redevelopment at the central campuses will reduce the need for
       journeys to outer locations and thus reduce vehicle emissions. The policy
       reduces the need for journeys by private transport and makes better use of the
       efficient public transport links to these locations. It also makes the most
       efficient use of the existing physical infrastructure.

       Equality Appraisal

6.38   The submitted policy will reduce the need for journeys by private transport,
       benefiting those people that do not have access to private transport, which will
       also benefit those on low incomes. The universities are obviously key players
       in providing educational opportunities, which will particularly benefit younger
       people of normal student age.

       Consultation Responses

6.39   The submitted policy was not presented at the Emerging Options stage, when
       consultation responses suggested that there should be such a policy. 52 This
       led to Preferred Option PCC5, which was supported by the University of
       Sheffield and the Sheffield First Health and Wellbeing Partnership. However,
       there were objections. One was from Sheffield One, that the wording was not
       strong enough to support expansion and the submitted policy now addresses
       this by encouraging expansion adjacent to existing areas as well as within
       them. Others from the Broomhill Neighbourhood Group suggested that the
       expansion of the University of Sheffield, in particular, would have an adverse
       affect on Broomhill. The City Council’s response is to reiterate the
       sustainability and locational advantages for the consolidation within the City
       Centre, which is highly accessible by a range of transport methods. The policy
       encourages expansion of the University in the City Centre, not in Broomhill.

       Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

6.40   The economic roles of the universities, particularly their research links with
       knowledge-based companies and innovative businesses is identified in
       several economic strategies as very important for the City. So a policy that
       encourages their development will help to enhance these important roles. The
       central locations of the universities, in particular, give Sheffield a unique
       character. The central location delivers benefits to other City Centre
       operations, as it increases footfall and spending power in the City Centre,
       creates a diverse City Centre economy and is a sustainable location for two
       institutions that draw a lot of visitors.. This makes them even more important
       to the City in sustainability terms, so they need to be encouraged to develop in
       their existing locations.

       Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)

6.41   The policy will be implemented by:

52
  Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy Emerging Options comment numbers 8.13 and
8.14

                                            72
          Working with the two universities to deliver this approach. The role of the
           City Council is considered to be ‘enabling’.

          Ensuring that City Policies, City Site allocations and designations on the
           Proposals Map encourage the continuing important role of the Universities.

          Determining planning applications.

       Suggestions for further delivery mechanisms have emerged from ongoing
       work on the City Centre Masterplan. Specifically they are:

          An agreement to joint working

          Production of comprehensive campus masterplans to guide investment
           and development in the future

          Further feasibility work to determine the potential for business incubation
           facilities associated with academic/ research activity; and,

          A commitment to investing in the quality of the campus environment and its
           maintenance.

6.42   The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
       policy SCC5 because completion of specific developments will reflect the
       resources and more particular priorities of the providers and these may be
       subject to change. The planning process will ensure that development needs
       in the named areas are met. The amount of new completed D1 floorspace
       (including for education facilities) will, however, be monitored and data
       recorded on the City Council’s planning applications database. This will be
       used to inform allocations in the City Sites document and future reviews of the
       Core Strategy.

       Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
6.43   The policy is considered relatively flexible in terms of the operation of the
       universities, as it encourages development in or next to their existing, but does
       not preclude their development elsewhere. Evidence presented in paragraph
       6.34 above shows that the universities have redevelopment their central
       campuses significantly in the past, so there can be confidence that they will
       continue this in line with the submitted policy.

       Conclusion
6.44   As the roles of the universities diversify, and the importance of the knowledge
       economy grows, the value of Sheffield’s two universities becomes greater.
       They are large and successful organisations that already have a major
       influence on the social and economic structure of the City, and the fact that
       they are generally very centrally located makes them even more important
       players in the City’s economy. The locational advantages of the City Centre
       are many. It is the most accessible part of the City and the universities, that
       attract a lot of visitors, are well located to enable these trips to be made by
                                           73
       public transport. The universities will help to create a diverse, dynamic and
       attractive City Centre, as their students, staff and visitors will also support
       other key centre functions such as shopping, leisure and culture. They also
       can support local companies and offices that do business with the universities.

6.45   So the continued redevelopment of the universities in these areas can bring
       significant benefits of vitality and vibrancy to the particular quarters in which
       they are located and to which they bring a specific cosmopolitan character.
       Consolidation in a particular location creates a destination and a presence that
       strengthens the role of the universities and makes it clear to all users of the
       City Centre where they are located. Dispersal would make it more difficult for
       visitors to find facilities and dilute the impact that the universities have,
       reducing their effectiveness. Consolidation is highly sustainable, as it means
       they will be accessible by public transport, as they will have a critical mass of
       buildings that will make it worthwhile for bus companies to provide services.




                                          74
7     HOUSING IN THE CITY CENTRE
        Introduction
7.1     Many of the recent changes to the City Centre have been as a result of new
        housing development in recent years. This has been due, in the most part, to
        a healthy market for City Centre living as Sheffield catches up with other cities.
        Current evidence is that this could continue if the city’s economy continues to
        grow. This will be monitored. City Centre housing can meet the needs of
        those who prefer not to live in houses in the suburbs and prefer the kind of
        living environment and location that the City Centre provides. The
        Government has encouraged more city-centre, higher-density living as a key
        component of the ‘Urban Renaissance’ outlined in the Urban Task Force
        Report53, and this has been reiterated in planning policy guidance.

7.2     Policy SH2 in the Core Strategy requires new housing development to be
        concentrated in the existing urban areas. In the period to 2020/21, the scale
        of new housing in then City Centre will be around 10,600 homes, so it will
        have an important role in providing for a significant amount of the City’s
        housing requirement.

7.3     The City Council commissioned DTZ to study the City Centre housing
        market.54 This study clearly identified potential for continued growth in the City
        Centre housing market (Executive Summary, page 2).

7.4     Student housing is likely to continue to be a significant factor in the City Centre
        as part of mixed housing developments, as student numbers in Sheffield rise
        and private companies and landlords take over from the universities
        themselves as providing accommodation. The DTZ report noted:

            “In terms of the student market, both of the Universities have high student
            numbers and plans for future growth and it is likely that the City Centre will
            continue to accommodate a large number of students in purpose built and
            general supply stock.”

7.5     But housing development affects the scope for developing and retaining other
        uses that are important for the City Centre and will need to be checked if the
        City Centre is to be strengthened as the main location for retail, employment,
        cultural and leisure destinations in Sheffield. One of the major benefits of City
        Centre living is to have facilities and attractions to hand but this only works if
        uses in the City Centre are truly mixed. So, ironically, the housing market
        could now be viewed as being ‘too’ successful for the good of the City Centre
        and Sheffield as a whole. The interest in building for other uses has been
        severely squeezed by the demand for housing. This has led to problems
        achieving a balance of uses.



53
   Towards a Strong Urban Renaissance - An independent report by members of the Urban Task
Force chaired by Lord Rogers of Riverside. Urban Task Force (1999)
54
   Sheffield City Centre Residential Market Assessment. DTZ / Sheffield City Council (June 2007)

                                                75
7.6       Bearing in mind the need to balance the mix of uses in the City Centre, it is
          clear that housing is better suited to certain parts of the City Centre than
          others. So there is a need to promote particular areas for City Centre housing.
          Many of the Area Action Plans, Masterplans and other strategies referred to
          above for the various Quarters address these requirements.

7.7       Other issues that affect the location of housing in the City Centre are flood risk
          and the relative location of night-time uses. Some of the most suitable
          locations for City Centre living are located alongside the City Centre’s rivers,
          these being generally good quality and desirable living environments.
          However, the risk of flooding in these areas can restrict opportunities. The
          City Council has also considered the impact of uses such as pubs, bars,
          nightclubs, etc., and produced guidance on such uses in the City Centre.55

          Policy SCC6 Housing in the City Centre
          Further expansion of City Centre living, with a mix of tenures and sizes
          of unit, including affordable housing, will be concentrated:

              (a) on the riverside at Kelham/ Neepsend and Wicker/ Nursery Street
              (b) between Netherthorpe Road and Edward Street.

          Housing will form part of a mix of uses:

              (c) between Netherthorpe Road and St. Vincent’s Church
              (d) at West Bar, north of the Crown Courts
              (e) around Devonshire Green
              (f) on upper levels along the Moor and in the New Retail Quarter
              (g) around the Peace Gardens
              (h) at Victoria Quays/ Castlegate
              (i) within the Cathedral Quarter
              (j) within the Cultural Industries Quarter.

          Limited housing will also be appropriate in other parts of the City Centre
          where needed as part of mixed schemes to achieve a viable balance of
          uses.

          Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
          National Policy

7.8       The submitted policy is consistent with PPS3, which encourages housing in
          existing centres as part of mixed developments (paragraph 38):

              “Options may include … providing housing as part of mixed-use town
              centre development”

7.9       Government guidance in PPS6, paragraph 1.9, recognises that:


55
     Night-time Uses: Interim Planning Guidance. Sheffield City Council (October 2005)

                                                   76
              “housing will be an important element in most mixed-use, multi-storey
              developments.”

7.10      PPS6 also encourages town centre uses such as retail, leisure and offices to
          be located in or around the core area of the City Centre (paragraph 2.16 and
          others), in which case the fringe areas could be considered more suited for
          residential uses.

7.11      PPS6, in paragraph 2.31 acknowledges that local planning authorities may
          need to make choices between competing development pressures in town
          centres. This is certainly the case with housing and other City Centre uses,
          which necessitates the specific policy to deal with housing in the City Centre.

          Regional Policy

7.12      The provision of suitable levels of housing in the City Centre in the most
          appropriate areas supports the Core Approach of the draft Regional Spatial
          Strategy, which in Policy YH5 states:

              “Regional and Sub-Regional Centres will be the prime focus for housing,
              employment, shopping, leisure, education, health and cultural activities and
              facilities in the region.

7.13      The Panel Report has suggested no significant change to this element of the
          policy in the RSS.

          Sub-Regional Policy

7.14      The South Yorkshire Spatial Strategy encourages housing in accessible
          locations (page 7):

              “spatial investment in South Yorkshire will concentrate on focused housing
              and related investments on those settlements which are most sustainable
              or which have the capacity to become most sustainable.”

          Other Sheffield Policies

7.15      The City Centre Living Strategy Supplementary Planning Guidance, produced
          by Sheffield City Council in April 200456, encourages housing development as
          long as it takes place in a sustainable way that builds stable, well-resourced
          communities that enjoy a high quality of life. It seeks to ensure that housing
          regeneration is co-ordinated with wider steps to regenerate the City Centre.

7.16      The City Centre Masterplan was produced in 2000. Work is underway on a
          roll-forward of this plan. Initial results suggest that the four underlying
          strategic objectives remain valid, one of which is to create a vibrant city as a
          centre for living.




56
     http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/planning-and-city-development/planning-documents/spg

                                                  77
7.17   Consultation on the roll-forward of the City Centre Masterplan has shown that
       attitudes are changing to city living amongst Sheffield residents. There is
       support for the development of balanced communities subject to the provision
       of adequate social infrastructure. If the City Centre is to thrive, it needs to
       consider how to achieve a more sustainable resident base. A key issue
       identified is to make the City Centre an attractive place to live with thriving
       communities, a range of housing types and tenures and prioritise particular
       locations for the development and consolidation of housing. The consultation
       event with the Sheffield 100 Forum57 supported new neighbourhoods with a
       mix of housing, particularly in the Wicker area (page 4), as well as
       improvements and integration of existing housing, with the St. Vincent’s are
       specifically mentioned. These areas are specifically referred to in the policy.

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)
7.18   The 2007 City Strategy does not cover the issue of City Centre housing, but
       there is considered to be no conflict between the aims of the City Strategy and
       the submitted policy.

       Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
       6)

       Core Strategy Objectives

7.19   Promotion of housing in the most suitable parts of the City Centre supports the
       Core Strategy objectives, specifically those to provide more housing with a
       wider range of types and create new sustainable neighbourhoods, as follows:

          S1.4 Housing provided to support economic transformation and provide for
           key workers

          S3.1 Successful housing markets across all tenures in all areas of the city
           and increased demand for housing in currently deprived areas

          S4.1 Vital and successful neighbourhoods sustained, restored or created

          S5.3 Wider choice of housing provided through more mixing of housing
           types and tenures, to meet the needs of the whole community

       Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

7.20   This policy is geographically very locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any
       neighbouring authorities will have policies that will impact upon it. Sheffield’s
       housing market overlaps with Rotherham and further work will be undertaken
       as part of the Sheffield/ Rotherham Housing Land Availability Assessment to
       assess the deliverability of sites with permission.



57
  Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Review and Roll-Forward – Sheffield 100 Workshop. EDAW
(2006)

                                              78
       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
7.21   The Emerging Options considered ranged from allowing more housing
       throughout the City Centre to restricting it in favour of other uses, with a
       compromise option to encourage it but focused in particular parts of the City
       Centre.

       Option CC1a Further expansion of City Centre living in all parts of the
       City Centre

7.22   This option would allow the current buoyant housing market demand for City
       Centre living to continue in virtually all parts of the City Centre, and is likely to
       lead to the highest number of new housing units in the City Centre.

7.23   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) Given the concentration of a variety of uses in the City Centre, residents of
           central Sheffield will generally need to travel less and will be more able to
           use public transport rather than the car.
       (b) If the City Centre housing market were to continue to be strong,
           encouraging large numbers of new dwellings would help to meet high
           demand and could assist in containing price rises.

       (c) An increase in the number of City Centre apartments could also help to
           release family-scale housing in outer areas that would satisfy a demand for
           larger dwellings.

       (d) A large City Centre population would improve the viability of local services,
           making them less reliant solely on workers or visitors. Customers would
           be available in evenings, at weekends and at holiday times, as well as
           during standard working hours.

       (e) Residential schemes currently generate greater financial returns and are
           less of an investment risk, so housing can be a vital financial component to
           create viability in mixed schemes.

7.24   The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) As housing will usually give a greater return on investment than other uses,
           there is likely to be more developer interest in building residential schemes.
           If landowners had hopes that all City Centre sites have potential housing
           use then these high values could make it prohibitive for developers to
           deliver any non-housing use.

       (b) The option could lead to a dominance of housing uses, which could restrict
           office development and retail spending here by office workers.

       (c) This option could lead to housing dominating in any new mixed-use
           schemes. In time, the mixed character of significant parts of the City
           Centre could be lost. This could conflict with Policy SCC1.


                                             79
       (d) A large amount of new housing in the City Centre could divert investment
           from housing proposed for the Housing Market Renewal (HMR) Pathfinder
           areas.

       Option CC1b Further expansion of City Centre living concentrated in
       certain areas such as the west side or fringes

7.25   This option draws on the strengths of Option CC1a but only in certain parts of
       the City Centre. It would generally be in line with the guidelines contained in
       the City Centre Living Strategy.

7.26   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) It would lead to residential quarters tending to be concentrated in areas of
           higher environmental quality.

       (b) This would create a variety of uses in the City Centre that would not
           happen if housing were to dominate in all areas.

       (c) The detrimental effects on housing of other City Centre uses such as bars
           and clubs will be minimised if there is physical separation between them.

       (d) There is more scope for developing vibrant, homogenous communities that
           have ready access to employment, leisure and shopping facilities if some
           mixing is allowed but distinct residential, retail, business and cultural areas
           are promoted.

       (e) The City’s housing requirements can be met without the need for
           widespread development of housing throughout the whole of the City
           Centre.

7.27   The weakness of this option is:

       (a) Restricting housing in some areas could reduce the overall number of
           mixed regeneration schemes that come forward.

       Option CC1c Limit City Centre living in favour of investment in jobs to
       ensure a balanced mix of uses

7.28   This option would involve resisting proposals for housing in much of the City
       Centre. In spatial terms it would mean concentrating housing around existing
       City Centre housing areas such as Netherthorpe and Broomspring, and in
       Kelham along the riverside and prohibiting housing largely in identified
       business, leisure and retail areas.

7.29   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) It would encourage more investment in other uses, particularly offices.

       (b) The diversity of uses in the City Centre is one of its key characteristics,
           which would be lost if housing begins to dominate.

                                           80
       (c) The option prevents housing-dominated regeneration that may not be
           economically sustainable if employment opportunities are limited.

       (d) Aspirational residential land values would disappear from many, which
           would help encourage more investment in employment uses in the City
           Centre.

7.30   The main weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) Many investment opportunities may depend on mixed or predominantly
           housing development, using housing to cross-subsidise other important,
           but less profitable uses. If residential uses are restricted, some of these
           development opportunities may be lost.

       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Planning Reasons

7.31   The submitted policy is derived from the emerging option CC1b.

7.32   Option CC1a for further expansion of City Centre living in all parts of the City
       Centre was rejected, as it was considered that this approach would be likely to
       conflict with achieving balanced economic regeneration. Sites that are
       considered best suited to office development, in order to achieve a balanced
       regeneration of the City Centre, would be lost to housing and this would
       prevent the City Centre realising its potential to provide jobs and services
       appropriate to the core of the city region. The spatial vision identifies the City
       Centre as the focus for offices, shops, leisure, culture, higher education and
       other services. On the other hand, the role of housing is seen as being to
       support and complement its primary role as a regional centre for jobs, shops
       and services.

7.33   Option CC1c to limit City Centre living in favour of investment in jobs was also
       rejected. This option could be argued to deliver the best economic scenario
       for the City Centre and City as a whole (as reflected in the sustainability
       appraisal results in 7.48 below), as it would help to deliver more employment
       and counter the problems currently created by high aspirational land values
       created by residential aspirations. But many investment opportunities rely on
       mixed business and housing development, using housing to fund less
       profitable uses. If residential uses are overly restricted, some of these
       development opportunities may be lost.

7.34   The promotion of housing in suitable City Centre areas is supported by the
       findings of the DTZ study. The Executive Summary, on page 3, states:

          “The renaissance of Sheffield City Centre has led to an upsurge in the
          supply of and demand for residential accommodation. As more employers
          move into the City, more employees are looking to live close to work.



                                           81
          Once a residential population is in place there is an opportunity to support
          a greater range of amenities and facilities i.e. health care, food retailers,
          gyms etc. In the current housing market, people are increasingly making
          decisions on were they want to work based on the quality and affordability
          of available accommodation in a reasonable commuting distance.
          Employers too are becoming more aware of this and look to locate or
          relocate to areas where they will be able to attract the right workforce.

          Having a resident population in a City Centre also contributes to the feeling
          of places being ’24 hour’ cities through people visiting bars, clubs, theatres
          and restaurants rather than places which are only busy during working
          hours.

          Housing has a key role in supporting mixed-use, flexible and sustainable
          development. Sheffield can position itself now to better respond to office
          and residential market changes. Some mixes work better than others and
          the market in Sheffield City Centre will take forward office, retail or
          residential development or a combination only if the development values
          and appraisals stack up financially.

7.35     Housing also has a very important role to play as one part of the mix of uses
       but, like all uses, it needs to complement these other uses and not displace
       them. The policy will contribute towards creating more sustainable travel
       patterns throughout the City as a whole. It would also help to maintain the
       distinctive Quarters that characterise the City Centre and maintain separation
       of housing and other uses, that will result in less potential conflict between
       them.

7.36   The provision of significant housing in appropriate areas of the City Centre has
       a potentially supportive role in relation to other City Centre uses. However, it
       is recognised that there is potential for conflict and so there is scope in the
       City Centre for achieving a level of separation. The submitted policy
       encourages a degree of separation between housing and other uses that
       could be incompatible, such as bars and nightclubs. So housing and other
       uses can still be located relatively close together in the City Centre, whilst still
       achieving an acceptable level of separation. But, this level of separation
       would be difficult to achieve if residential uses were to be encouraged in all
       City Centre areas.

7.37   Encouraging City Centre living improves the viability of City Centre businesses
       such as bars, cafés, restaurants and so on that may rely on customers
       throughout the day and week. This could have a knock-on effect that
       significant numbers of visitor outlets makes for a more vibrant location that
       would encourage more businesses to locate in the City Centre and further
       enhance the vitality and viability of the centre. Again, this will depend on the
       market delivering these facilities, as the option could allow housing to
       dominate in all areas in the City Centre.

7.38   The locations for housing are identified where they would not conflict with
       other uses, such as night-time uses. They are in areas of higher
       environmental quality (such as along riversides), and where there are lower

                                            82
       concentrations of conflicting uses, for example bars, pubs and nightclubs. The
       areas on the fringes of the City Centre are likely to be less attractive for other
       City Centre uses such as offices and shopping. Sheffield City Centre is
       relatively compact and housing has proved successful throughout, including
       the fringe areas.

7.39   This complementarity also enhances the City Centre as a place to live. The
       City Centre is an area that not only acts as a sub-regional and wider
       destination for work and leisure, but is also a local centre in itself, that can
       provide its residents with all the services they need, making it a highly
       sustainable location for living.

7.40   A major reason for supporting extensive housing in the City Centre is that land
       values are higher in the City Centre, so the costs of development are relatively
       high. If housing is included within mixed schemes, it can finance the provision
       of other important uses, such as offices, that do not currently generate such
       high financial returns. In this way housing can be a financial tool that can be
       used to deliver vital City Centre uses that may not be viable on their own in
       single use development schemes. This reason for supporting City Centre
       housing means that it has to be in areas where business uses are also
       acceptable.

7.41   The areas set out in the submitted policy are where housing is established,
       and there are lower concentrations of other, generally conflicting uses, such
       as bars, pubs and nightclubs, that would reduce the environmental quality, so
       the conditions there are already generally well suited to further housing
       development. The residential environment in these areas is good, so there
       are particular opportunities for mixed-use development that includes
       substantial amounts of housing. Where these areas are on the fringes of the
       City Centre, they are likely to be less attractive and less significant for
       alternative City Centre uses such as offices and shopping.

7.42   The greatest potential is identified in two areas:

       (a) On the riverside at Kelham / Neepsend and Wicker / Nursery Street – this
           area has particular development potential that could deliver much of the
           requirement for housing in the City Centre. There is a recently established
           residential community in this area, and there is a particular advantage of
           the riverside setting, that is well suited to housing use, as noted in Policy
           SCC1.

       (b) Between Netherthorpe Road and Edward Street – this is a long-
           established residential area that also has potential for contributing to the
           City’s housing requirement.

7.43   However, a wide range of other areas are identified in the policy and the
       scope for integrating with business uses is greatest here:

       (c) Between Netherthorpe Road and St. Vincent’s church – this has been
           identified as an opportunity area for housing in the St. Vincent’s Action
           Plan and the potential is identified in policy SCC1. This area is close to

                                           83
          existing housing and will be an attractive residential location, affording
          good views over much of the City and benefiting from a new open space
          area (see policy SCC11).

       (d) At West Bar, north of the Crown Courts – this is a large redevelopment
           area with significant opportunities for mixed development including housing
           that would benefit from a new neighbourhood centre and public space (see
           policy SCC1(k)).

       (e) Around Devonshire Green – this is already established as a residential
           area, close to the largest open space in the City Centre, which is
           undergoing refurbishment.

       (f) Upper levels along the Moor and in the New Retail Quarter – both the Moor
           and the NRQ are major new regeneration proposals offering
           redevelopment opportunities that can include housing as an appropriate
           mix of uses.

       (g) Around the Peace Gardens – new high quality city living is being
           introduced here in significant numbers, that will be located next to the best
           the City Centre has to offer in terms of cultural and leisure facilities and
           quality civic open space.

       (h) At Victoria Quays / Castlegate – Victoria Quays as a waterside location
           offers a quality environment, and there are opportunities that will arise as a
           result of redevelopment of the area, based around the Sheffield Castle
           ruins, where new open space will be created, and benefiting from the
           reconfiguration of the road network on completion of the northern section
           of the Inner Relief Road.

       (i) Within the Cathedral Quarter –policy SCC1(b) identifies the area as one
           with the potential for a wider mix of uses that offers residential
           opportunities.

       (j) Within the Cultural Industries Quarter – this area benefits from both a
           recently established new residential population and a riverside location,
           with proposals for a new open space (see policy SCC11).

7.44   Some of the areas identified are vulnerable to flooding though others are not.
       The areas between Netherthorpe Road and Edward Street, and between
       Netherthorpe Road and St. Vincent’s Church, West Bar (north of the Crown
       Courts), around Devonshire Green, the Moor and the New Retail Quarter, the
       Cathedral Quarter and the Peace Gardens are all situated within Zone 1 Low
       Probability.

7.45   But, a large proportion of Kelham/ Neepsend and Wicker/ Nursery Street is
       situated in Zone 3a High Probability, subject to flooding from the River Don.
       About half of the Cultural Industries Quarter (south and east) is situated within
       Zone 3a High Probability, due to flooding from the River Porter and the River
       Sheaf. Victoria Quays is situated in Zone 2 Medium Probability, subject to
       flooding from the River Don.

                                           84
7.46   Housing developments are classed as ‘more vulnerable’, according to the
       Flood Risk Vulnerability Classification in PPS25. Therefore any housing
       development proposed in Zone 3a must pass the Exception Test. The issue is
       discussed more fully in the Housing Background Report because of the need
       to weigh flood risk and the need for land to meet development requirements.
       Policy SH4 indicates that sites in priority locations (including the City Centre)
       without development constraints will be included in Phase 1 but the existence
       of flood risk means at least the deferring of development. If and when it is
       concluded that it is needed on sites at risk it will be necessary to take account
       of any flood protection measures taken by that time, the precise extent of risk
       as advised at that time and mitigation through design and layout. More
       specific guidance on the particular sites affected will be given in the City Sites
       document.

7.47   In the meantime, it is considered that the principle of housing in the named
       areas should remain with the provision to defer and restrict new housing as
       required. The sites in question are identified in the Housing Background
       Report in connection with policy SH4.

       Sustainability Appraisal

7.48   The submitted policy performs better than the one of the rejected options
       overall, and to a similar level as the other rejected option. It seeks to increase
       City Centre housing, which will boost the City Centre economy, whilst also
       limiting competition for sites for employment uses, thus achieving an effective
       balance between City Centre living and employment uses that will deliver the
       best overall economic performance. New City Centre Living accommodation
       is likely to be designed with security in mind and provide safe public spaces.
       Increased population will create a demand for cultural, leisure and recreation
       uses that will help to maintain and enhance their provision for the whole City.
       New housing development can also deliver new public spaces. The locations
       identified are all highly accessible by public transport, and the option also
       allows for significant provision of other uses within the City Centre such as
       offices, that also require accessible locations. Mixing of housing and
       employment in the City Centre will also help to reduce the need to travel, and
       this will help to reduce vehicle emissions.

7.49   In many cases it is possible to achieve greater quality of design with housing
       schemes in the City Centre, as they provide the greater financial return to
       developers. Also, the promotion of housing on sites with existing buildings
       that require protection is more likely to result in effective and sympathetic re-
       use of buildings where this is an option, as conversion of existing buildings to
       housing uses is often the most viable way of reusing the buildings. The option
       will promote good use of the City Centre’s physical infrastructure.

7.50   The policy scores better than the option to allow housing throughout the City
       Centre, as the rejected option could restrict other important City Centre uses
       that are necessary for a healthy and vibrant City Centre. It also is more
       economically sustainable than the other rejected option, as City Centre


                                           85
       housing is one of the uses that is considered to contribute to the economic
       performance of the City Centre.

       Equality Appraisal

7.51   This submitted policy was the joint highest scoring of the options, as more
       housing in the City Centre means more people living close to services and to
       public transport to access them. This will include people on low incomes.

       Consultation Responses

7.52   The policy was generally supported in responses to the Emerging Options,
       including by Sheffield One, Sheffield First for Investment (now part of Creative
       Sheffield) and the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE).

7.53   Caution was expressed by some consultees that the ‘city living’ boom may not
       last and is not delivering a diversity of people living in the City Centre. This is
       something that should be improved. The issue of the overall scale of provision
       in the City Centre is taken up in SH2. SCC6 is more about distribution within
       the centre. Action Plans can also require a mix of housing tenures to be
       provided in new developments. The St. Vincent’s Action Plan is an example
       of where this is an adopted requirement.

7.54   There was a mix of support and objections to the policy (as Preferred Option
       PCC3), with some responses wanting the policy to refer to provision of
       facilities and design, which are covered in other policies, and one objecting to
       specifying locations in the City Centre because it was considered that PPS3
       put an emphasis on development within town and city centres on previously
       developed land and the policy was repeating this national guidance. Also that
       the specificity put forward in the Core Strategy is not suitable for this level of
       policy document. This equates to the rejected option CC1a. The City Council
       did not agree with this view, as the policy seeks to encourage City Centre
       living and identify the best areas for it, whilst promoting other uses in other
       parts of the City Centre where they are most appropriate. This is intended to
       achieve balanced regeneration of the City Centre, and prevent one use
       becoming dominant. Recent experience has suggested that, in general,
       developers consider most City Centre sites primarily for residential uses, due
       to the nature of the housing market, often at the expense of other vital City
       Centre uses. So there is a need to identify the parts of the City Centre where
       housing should be focussed, balanced with identifying areas where other uses
       need to be encouraged by restricting housing uses.

       Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

7.55   City Centre living is clearly beneficial for reasons of changing household
       requirements and market demand, supporting regeneration and mixing of uses
       and sustainability in relation to use of land and transport.. But, of all the main
       City Centre uses, it is the one that requires the most robust of strategic
       policies in order to ensure that those benefits are maximised, as it has the
       potential, given the current market, to dominate over other uses that are
       distinctive to the City Centre. The Core Strategy must ensure housing is

                                           86
       focussed in the most suitable areas for further residential use, and restricted in
       other areas that are required for achieving adequate amounts of the other
       uses required to achieve a balanced redevelopment of the City Centre as a
       whole. This is what the policy sets out.

       Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)
7.56   The policy will be implemented by:

          Ensuring the City Policies, Proposals Map and City Sites documents reflect
           the priorities for housing set out in the policy.

          The drafting of appropriate Action Plans.

          Determining planning applications.

          Ensuring that the City Centre Masterplan is compatible with the submitted
           policy.

7.57   The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
       policy SCC6. Policy SH2 does, however, set a target (10,600 dwellings) for
       new housing development in the City Centre over the period 2004/05 to
       2020/21. Although it is not proposed to publish dwelling completion figures for
       SDF sub-areas in the Annual Monitoring Report, completions in the City
       Centre would contribute to the housing trajectory (see Housing Background
       Report). The number of completed dwellings in each of the sub-areas will,
       however, be monitored and data recorded on the City Council’s planning
       applications database. This will be used to inform allocations in the City Sites
       document and future reviews of the Core Strategy.

       Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
7.58   This policy is primarily about the specific areas that are promoted for housing,
       but it is based on the need to balance housing with other uses throughout the
       City Centre, so the wider issue of the City Centre housing market is relevant.

7.59   There is a significant degree of flexibility within this provision that allows
       housing in other areas as part of a mix of uses.

7.60   Policy SH2 requires 10,600 new dwellings to be provided in the City Centre, to
       2020/21. These will need to be substantially accommodated in the areas
       stated, and there would be a risk to the delivery of policy SCC6 if there was
       insufficient capacity in these areas. However, given that City Centre housing
       tends to be of a high density, it is considered likely that the areas can
       accommodate this scale of development. The Core Strategy Housing
       Background Report estimates the capacity.

7.61   The overall benefits of a balanced approach to housing and business in the
       City Centre will occur as long as there is effective mixing of uses in the City
       Centre as a whole, and that levels of development are high enough to ensure


                                            87
       a sustainable level of development that will deliver economic and social
       benefits.

7.62   If demand were to fall there could be a risk of not attracting a critical mass of
       development. But the DTZ report identified some risks to future delivery of
       housing in the medium to long term but considered that the market was
       currently strong enough to sustain the current level of development in the
       pipeline. The City Centre residential market still has further growth
       opportunities and there confidence in the strength of the City Centre housing
       market and an appetite for further development. The number of people in the
       20-40 age group is likely to grow rapidly, which will fuel demand for City
       Centre living. The majority of new housing in the City Centre in the pipeline is
       one and two bed apartments, but rising interests rates and a cooling of the
       housing market, means there is a risk of over-supply. There is some latent
       demand from ‘empty nesters’, graduates, students, young families and those
       wanting larger apartments in the City Centre. 56% of the people questioned
       as part of the study indicated that they would consider the City Centre as a
       place to live.

       Conclusion
7.63   This policy is all about achieving the right balance between residential and
       other uses in the City Centre, both in terms of the amount of development
       achieved and the areas in which it takes place. The DTZ study has shown
       that there is a need to control City Centre living in order to get a balance in the
       types of housing that is developed. It is considered that the policy achieves
       the right degree of control in determining the spatial priorities for City Centre
       living locations, whilst also allowing significant freedom and flexibility to
       develop housing in a wide range of locations as part of mixed developments
       that deliver other priority uses.

7.64   The benefits of more City Centre housing are improved sustainability through
       use of the City Centre as an accessible location, a safer environment with a
       round-the-clock and weekend presence, greater vitality, liveliness, interest and
       attractiveness and the generation of new uses for vacant sites buildings. City
       Centre housing can also meet the needs of particular groups of people who
       would prefer not to live in houses in the suburbs. The Government has also
       encouraged more City Centre, higher-density living as a key component of the
       ‘Urban Renaissance’ outlined in the Urban Task Force Report, and this has
       been reiterated in planning policy guidance.




                                           88
8        MANUFACTURING AND THE CITY CENTRE –
         TRANSITION AREAS
          Introduction

8.1       Sheffield grew predominantly on metal industries and many of these
          developed in areas that are now part of the modern City Centre. But it is
          debateable whether the City Centre, given its topography, restricted
          accessibility for industrial traffic and competition from other, possibly more
          suitable and viable uses, can deliver the locational requirements and
          expectations of modern heavy manufacturing and distribution.

8.2       The St Vincent’s Quarter is an example of an industrial area in the City Centre.
          Most businesses here are located in old premises on sloping, restricted sites
          with poor access. Many of the industries here have been present for many
          years, some have moved into the area because premises are old and of
          restricted use so are cheap to rent.

8.3       Industrial operations vary and some are relatively light, low-impact uses that
          may not have the same requirements for premises as heavy industry. This
          distinction is recognised in the Use Classes Order that identifies light industry
          as falling within the B1 class where it can operate alongside sensitive uses
          such as housing, whereas heavy manufacturing that would cause adverse
          impacts if located close to residential uses is in the separate B2 use class. So
          the fact that B2 uses (many of which operate in areas such as St. Vincent’s)
          and residential uses are incompatible could create problems where City
          Centre living is becoming more widespread.

8.4       ‘Manufacturing’ is defined as industrial uses designated as B2 uses in the Use
          Classes Order, or ‘general industrial’. The policy does not include light
          industrial uses, which are in Use Class B1, and defined as light industry
          appropriate in a residential area58. So the industrial uses referred to in this
          policy are, by definition, those that cannot operate alongside residential uses.
          ‘Transition Areas’ are locations where industrial and manufacturing uses are
          present but regeneration through alternative uses is happening. Transition
          areas in the City Centre are shown on the Key Diagram.

          Policy SCC7 Manufacturing and the City Centre – Transition
          Areas
          Manufacturing in City Centre transition areas should not expand where it
          would detract from the regeneration of the centre and it will be
          encouraged to relocate, providing suitable alternative sites and premises
          are available in the city. Transition areas include:

             (a) parts of St. Vincent’s area
             (b) part of Kelham/ Neepsend
             (c) part of Wicker/ Riverside

58
     www.planningportal.gov.uk/england/genpub/en/1011888237913.html

                                               89
           (d) most of West Bar
           (e) the southern part of the Devonshire Quarter
           (f) parts of the Cultural Industries Quarter.

       Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
       National Policy

8.5    PPS3 and PPS6 promote housing in centres (see paragraphs 7.8 to 7.11). By
       definition, industrial uses are incompatible in the same location as housing
       uses, so the submitted policy, that seeks to relocate manufacturing from the
       City Centre, will help to achieve the aims of this national guidance.

       Regional Policy

8.6    The draft RSS anticipates that ‘bad-neighbour’ and ‘low value’ industrial uses,
       may be displaced from existing sites. Paragraph 14.23 states:

            “LPAs will need to consider the provision of replacement sites for ‘bad-
            neighbour’ and ‘low value’ industrial uses, which may be displaced from
            existing sites.”

8.7    The Panel Report into the draft RSS has acknowledged a need to promote the
       re-structuring of manufacturing to promote industrial regeneration in the
       region. Recommendation 4.2 on page 36 of the Panel Report is to:

            “Include within Policy E1 a commitment to support the manufacturing
            sector of the economy and to encourage modernisation of manufacturing
            industries as part of the Region’s economy.”

       Sub-Regional Policy

8.8    The submitted policy is fully in line with the South Yorkshire Spatial Strategy
       (SYSS), which on page 9:59 states:

            “Many viable economic and employment opportunities arise from industries
            which use a lot of space relative to the value-added, for example some
            light manufacture and logistical functions. For them, the more central
            urban locations are unlikely to be viable. They will be helped to find more
            competitive locations in outlying settlements easily accessible to the
            transport network and the labour pool.”

8.9    The policy is also supported by the SYSS on page 12:

            “It is proposed that manufacturing operations that wish to relocate from
            town and city centres should be supported in doing so.”

       Other Sheffield Policies

59
  Sub-Regional Spatial Strategy Vision for South Yorkshire. Ideasmiths Consulting Partnership /
South Yorkshire Partnership (November 2004)

                                                90
8.10   Work on devising the office strategy in the roll-forward of the City Centre
       Masterplan has also identified the need to screen out manufacturing uses from
       the areas promoted for office use, which is consistent with the submitted
       policy. This approach was supported by the consultation exercise undertaken
       with the Sheffield 100 Forum60, who supported the proposal to relocate
       industrial uses.

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)
8.11   The 2007 City Strategy has a Big Ambition that the City’s economy will match
       the best cities in Europe. The focus will be on boosting innovation, enterprise
       and private investment in the City (page 18). It is considered that the
       submitted policy will be broadly in line with this ambition, by seeking to create
       better conditions for business in the City Centre.

       Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
       6)

       Core Strategy Objectives

8.12   The compatibility of this policy with the objectives is through the
       encouragement to housing that the restriction of manufacturing gives:

          S2.1 The City Centre and complementary areas regenerated as the core
           location for major expansion of business, shopping, leisure and culture

          S3.1 Successful housing markets across all tenures in all areas of the city
           and increased demand for housing in currently deprived areas

       Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

8.13   This policy is geographically very locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any
       neighbouring authorities will have policies that will impact upon it.

       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
8.14   The options suggested are whether to discourage the further development and
       expansion of industrial operations, or to allow industrial uses to continue.

       Option CC4a Industry in the City Centre should not expand and should
       be encouraged to relocate.

8.15   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) The presence of industrial uses along with this new housing could cause
           conflict. Relocating industrial uses from the City Centre would remove the


60
  Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Review and Roll-Forward – Sheffield 100 Workshop. EDAW
(2006)

                                              91
          risk of conflict between the expectations of residents and the needs of
          industry and could make City Centre communities more attractive.

       (b) Relocation can improve the competitiveness and viability of companies,
           where it would result in the removal of constraints to their operation that
           they are currently suffering due to their central location.

       (c) Offices are more appropriate than industry as employment uses in the City
           Centre, and the relocation of industry would free up more sites for new
           office development.

       (d) Encouraging housing on existing industrial sites will increase land values,
           which would assist with the cost of industrial relocation to alternative sites.

8.16   The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) Being in a central location has accessibility advantages for industrial
           companies, as it should generally be easier for their workers to get to their
           place of employment.

       (b) This option would place serious constraints on any expansion of
           businesses that are unable to relocate and this could reduce their
           competitiveness.

       Option CC4b City Centre industry of all kinds is free to continue and
       expand for as long as they wish

8.17   The strength of this option is:

       (a) There would be no disruption to the day-to-day operation of existing firms
           in the City Centre.

8.18   The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) It would jeopardise the potential to achieve significant levels of
           regeneration of the run-down City Centre industrial areas due to the
           benefits of increased land values.

       (b) The ability to deliver regeneration that requires some element of housing
           will be severely limited by the continued presence of heavy manufacturing.

       (c) The development of the City Centre as a major regional office centre could
           be jeopardised by the continuing presence of industrial operations.

       A Preferred Option, PB6, has been amalgamated into this submitted policy, as
       it was considered to be an issue that was unique to the City Centre.




                                            92
       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Reasons for the areas selected

       Planning Reasons

8.19   The option to allow industry of all kinds to be free to continue and expand in
       the City Centre was rejected, as it would jeopardise the potential to achieve
       significant levels of regeneration of the run-down City Centre industrial areas
       through the benefits of increased land values and subsequent relocations.
       Regeneration of the City Centre through housing would be severely limited by
       the continued presence of heavy manufacturing. The development of the City
       Centre as a major regional office centre could also be jeopardised by the
       continuing presence of industrial operations, as some major potential
       occupiers could be put off by proximity to old, run-down industrial operations

8.20   Office uses deliver a greater density of employment and the nature of sites in
       the City Centre is such that they are often more suited to high rise
       development, which makes their capacity for providing a large amount of office
       space even greater. The presence of industry can also detract from the
       overall attractiveness of the City Centre. This can dissuade potential office
       occupiers and developers, as well as other potential visitors and investors. So
       a switch of employment uses from industrial to offices on City Centre sites
       would deliver considerable employment and regeneration benefits.

8.21   Some areas of Sheffield are in a state of transition with a trend away from
       ‘traditional’, well-established manufacturing, towards more sensitive uses,
       particularly housing. The renewal of these areas means managing and
       encouraging this process. Industry is unsuitable close to sensitive uses such
       as housing. In the City Centre, where housing is expected to develop, there is
       a direct conflict.

8.22   But relocation can only be considered in conjunction with other Core Strategy
       policies, for example PB1 that seeks to ensure there is sufficient land for
       manufacturing uses in the future, including any relocations required.

8.23   Industry in the City Centre, particularly when it is becoming run-down, can give
       a negative perception of the economic health of the City Centre. This does
       not fit in with aspirations to transform the economy of the city. Relocating
       industrial uses from the City Centre would encourage the regeneration of
       these transition areas and would give the signal needed to attract office
       developers and raise land values to a point where relocation becomes
       economically viable for the businesses. Relocation, funded by the sale of their
       existing premises, could be the only option for some companies to continue,
       and this could only be possible in many cases if the value of their site is raised
       by the potential for residential of office development.

8.24   Industry could cause conflict with sensitive uses, particularly housing.
       Preferred option PCC3 above seeks to promote housing in suitable areas of
       the City Centre, so the presence of industry in the City Centre will jeopardise
       both existing and potential new City Centre living. Relocating industrial uses

                                           93
       from the City Centre would remove this risk of conflict and could make City
       Centre communities more attractive, thus improving their viability.
       Redevelopment opportunities can help to fund such relocations.

8.25   If housing is encouraged on existing City Centre industrial sites, land values
       will greatly increase, as landowners recognise that their sites could have
       potential for residential and other non-industrial uses. This will greatly assist in
       the delivery of the regeneration of large areas of the City Centre, as set out in
       the Core Strategy.

8.26   It is clear that there are significant operational problems facing many industrial
       operations in the City Centre. For example, sites are often not flat and access
       for lorries and vans is restricted. Vehicle parking is limited. Buildings are old,
       cramped, on several levels and generally not fit for purpose. The relocation of
       these industrial operations from these City Centre sites to more suitable sites
       outside the City Centre would assist the continued operation of many existing
       firms that are currently struggling to do business on inappropriate sites in
       unsuitable locations.

8.27   Relocation will improve the competitiveness and viability of companies, where
       it would result in the removal of constraints to their operation that they are
       currently suffering due to their central location. Housing uses have already
       begun to be introduced into industrial areas in the City Centre and this is
       creating more problems for industry as constraints to their operation become
       more and more of a problem. Action Plans are advocating residential uses
       that require the removal of industrial uses if this is to be delivered.

8.28   Offices are the most appropriate employment use in the City Centre and the
       relocation of industry would free up more sites for new office development.
       Office uses deliver a greater density of employment per square metre of
       floorspace, and the nature of the City Centre sites means they are more suited
       to multi-storey development, which makes their capacity for providing a large
       amount of employment space even greater. Office buildings can make
       effective use of difficult, sloping sites with restricted access. The presence of
       industry also detracts from the overall attractiveness of the City Centre for
       office occupiers. So a switch of employment uses from industrial to offices on
       City Centre sites would deliver considerable employment, regeneration and
       environmental benefits.

8.29   National policy on flood risk is outlined in chapter 2 in the Planning Reasons
       section (see paragraph 2.31). Some of the Transition Areas are affected by
       flood risk:

8.30   St. Vincent’s, West Bar and the southern part of the Devonshire Quarter area
       is situated within Zone 1 Low Probability. A large proportion of Kelham/
       Neepsend and Wicker/ Riverside is situated in Zone 3a High Probability,
       subject to flooding from the River Don. The remaining areas are situated within
       Zone 1 Low Probability.

8.31   About half of the Cultural Industries Quarter (south and east) is situated within
       Zone 3a High Probability, due to flooding from the River Porter and the River

                                            94
       Sheaf. There are no known localised non-river flooding issues within this
       area, however there a likelihood of susceptibility to culvert blockage and/or
       surcharging if regular maintenance is not carried out.

       Sustainability Appraisal

8.32   The submitted policy performs better than the rejected option overall. There
       are uses other than industry that can better capitalise on the locational
       advantages of the City Centre, particularly office uses, that could deliver
       greater economic and employment benefits. Removing industry from the City
       Centre could improve air quality, and new industrial premises are likely to be
       cleaner than older buildings. Limiting industry would improve the situation
       whereby pedestrian safety problems occur where large delivery vehicles, etc.,
       are operating in the City Centre. New offices and housing to replace industry
       in the City Centre could encourage the provision of cultural, leisure and
       recreation facilities as a result of increased demand for them, which will make
       these facilities more readily available for all. Industrial uses do not benefit
       from high accessibility to the same extent as other, more intensive uses, such
       as offices, so the relocation of industry from the City Centre in favour of these
       alternative uses is a more efficient use of the transport network. The reuse of
       City Centre land for more intensive uses is a more efficient use of scarce land
       resources and relocated industry is likely to develop on brownfield land.
       Redevelopment of industrial sites and buildings in the City Centre is likely to
       lead to an improvement in design and quality of both existing and new
       buildings. This approach can help to save historic buildings, as
       redevelopment could take place for higher value uses, such as offices and
       housing, that should generally enable the retention of buildings. The
       redevelopment of industrial sites for other uses that generate more trips can
       make more use of public transport and enable emissions to be reduced. Many
       of the older industrial properties operating in the City Centre are alongside the
       rivers, and redevelopment could enable new flood protection to be installed
       where necessary.

       Equality Appraisal

8.33   The policy promotes more intensive uses in the City Centre than industry. As
       public transport provision to the City Centre is better than anywhere else in the
       City, this will benefit those with limited access to private transport, including
       those on low incomes.

       Consultation Responses

8.34   There was general support for the option at Emerging Options stage, including
       from Sheffield First for Investment (now part of Creative Sheffield) and
       Yorkshire Forward. Most of the concerns expressed about the option were
       actually to do with the role of light industrial uses, which are not affected by
       this policy.

8.35   The Preferred Option PB6, that has been amalgamated into this submitted
       policy, was the most favoured of the options by a fairly large margin, and by
       key stakeholders such as South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive,

                                          95
       who supported that option as one that would encourage more intensive
       development in the City Centre. Yorkshire Forward and Sheffield First for
       Investment viewed this option as one that would improve the City’s economic
       performance, particularly in terms of creating a better working environment for
       manufacturers and improving the economic environment of the City Centre.
       But there was also some general concern that the success of the option was
       very much dependent on ensuring that sufficient land and sites in the right
       areas were available for relocation.

       Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

8.36   There are very clear economic advantages for companies to relocate to more
       suitable premises, as well as being imperative to ensure that City Centre living
       can develop and deliver the benefits set out in Policy SCC6. The case was
       also clearly supported in the sustainability appraisal.

       Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)
8.37   The policy will be delivered by:

          Determining planning applications – new industrial development in the
           Transition Areas will not be permitted, as this would encourage
           manufacturing to continue here.

          Committing to the transformation of the affected areas and an effective
           strategy to provide land and sites for relocating companies. Masterplans
           and Area Action plans will need to tackle the issue of industry in the
           Transition Areas, as well as the need to identify and promote areas
           suitable for relocation.

          Ensuring assistance from the City Council’s regeneration partners and
           using funding options wherever possible. More detail is given on how this
           can be achieved in the Core Strategy Business and Industry Background
           Report, particularly relating to policy SB1 on the provision of land.

          Providing financial assistance where necessary for some companies to
           relocate. This could be addressed through masterplans and Action Plans
           and, wherever possible, through grant assistance. Again, more detail is
           given in the Core Strategy Business and Industry Background Report.

          Ensuring there are options for relocation for the companies involved as
           part of the overall strategy for transformation. The promotion of areas for
           industrial uses in other policies such

8.38   More details of delivery mechanisms are included in the Delivery Schedules in
       Appendix 1.

8.39   The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
       policy SCC7. A number of targets and indicators in relation to policies SB1
       and SB4 are, however, relevant (see Business and Industry Background
       Report).

                                           96
8.40   The amount of industrial floorspace developed for non-B2/B8 uses in the
       named locations will, however, also be monitored and data recorded on the
       City Council’s planning applications database. This will be used to inform
       allocations in the City Sites document and future reviews of the Core Strategy.

       Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
8.41   There will be disruption to the day-to-day operation of existing firms in the City
       Centre if this option is successful. They would not be allowed to expand and
       this would restrict the continued and intended future operations of the
       businesses. Successful relocation would be the only beneficial outcome, so
       this needs to be achieved. So, to be effective, the SDF would need to ensure
       positive provision for industry for relocation in more appropriate areas outside
       of the City Centre, as identified in policies SB4, SLD2, SLD3, SUD1, SNE2
       and SCH1.

8.42   The relocation areas need to be suitable and in sustainable locations as far as
       possible. There may be issues of accessibility – one advantage of the City
       Centre as a location for industry is its accessibility for workers.

8.43   There is also a need to ensure that important industrial heritage is not lost
       through redevelopment, so relocation options will also have to consider the
       need to retain historic and important buildings.

8.44   Relocation can cause significant disruption to companies. Some companies
       are well established in City Centre locations and face serious practical
       difficulties to relocate. The costs of closing one operation, and moving staff
       and equipment to another location, can be considerable, especially where
       heavy or specialised machinery requires moving - and in some cases it may
       be extremely difficult and costly to relocate companies. Costs are even higher
       where new premises need to be constructed and financial support, using grant
       regimes, may be necessary to facilitate some moves. Where Action Plans are
       advocating such relocations, issues of how to facilitate them will be need to be
       addressed in these Plans. In the long term some firms could even face
       closure. There will be tough choices to be made and some financial hardship
       to be suffered by existing industries that would need to be relocated if this
       option was to be fully pursued. Relocation can cause significant disruption to
       companies. Financial support packages may be required to facilitate moves.
       There can be serious financial and logistical difficulties and constraints to
       relocation, for example where heavy or specialised machinery requires
       moving, and in some cases it may be extremely costly to move companies.
       However, residential values can generate good financial returns and there
       may also be funding assistance available.

8.45   Housing uses have already begun to be introduced into industrial areas in the
       City Centre. As this continues, constraints to the operation of existing firms
       are likely to become more and more of a problem. But redevelopment
       opportunities can help to fund relocation.



                                           97
       Conclusion
8.46   There are several policies in the Core Strategy that promote housing in the
       City Centre in a wide variety of locations (such as SCC1, SCC6, SH2). These
       policies will be difficult to deliver while there are manufacturing operations
       taking place in the City Centre that are incompatible with housing. So there is
       a need for a policy that seeks to achieve the relocation of these businesses
       from the City Centre to other areas where they can operate more effectively
       and efficiently, free of the constraints that their City Centre sites suffer, and
       enable city living to spread into appropriate areas.




                                           98
9        TALL BUILDINGS IN THE CITY CENTRE
          Introduction
9.1       There are currently a limited number of tall buildings in Sheffield, but there are
          several either being proposed or under construction, many of which are listed
          in Table 6. They can be used to emphasize the dramatic contours of the city
          and to create landmark structures that make a bold and confident statement
          about the economic health of the City. In the City Centre, they can be used to
          achieve a greater density of development on valuable sites that are restricted
          in size.

9.2       The Urban Design Compendium (UDC)61 already gives specific informal
          guidance on general design and siting of potential new tall buildings. This
          issue would enable the strategic aspects of this guidance to feature in the
          formal planning framework.

9.3       The UDC) currently gives specific informal guidance on general design and
          siting of potential new tall buildings. But there are strategic implications of this
          guidance that needs to be covered by the Core Strategy.

9.4       As well as bringing economic benefits, these buildings can have a significant
          visual impact. So design issues are important, and the principles set out in the
          UDC should be closely followed.

9.5       For the purposes of the Core Strategy, ‘tall buildings’ comprise any buildings
          that are substantially higher than their context or that will shape the City’s
          skyline

          Policy SCC8 Tall Buildings in the City Centre
          Tall buildings may be appropriate in the City Centre where they:

              (a) help to define identified gateway sites,
              (b) mark an area of civic importance,
              (c) mark a principle activity node or a key route,
              (d) form the focal point of a vista or enhance the city skyline
              (e) re-inforce the topography
              (f) support the vision for City Centre quarters
              (g) reflect the strategic economic vision for the city.

          Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
          National Policy

9.6       Tall buildings have been encouraged by central Government in PPS1 in
          paragraph 27, that promotes high-density development to make efficient use
          of land. PPS6 encourages higher density, multi-storey development in centres
          where appropriate. Objectives are set out, one of them being (paragraph 1.5):
61
     Sheffield City Centre Urban Design Compendium. Sheffield City Council (September 2004)

                                                 99
           “to deliver more sustainable patterns of development, ensuring that
           locations are fully exploited through high-density, mixed-use development”

9.7    PPS362 encourages consideration of higher densities to make more efficient
       use of land in appropriate locations (paragraph 46).

9.8    High-density development in appropriate areas and centres is encouraged in
       PPS6. Paragraph 2.4 states:

           “Wherever possible, growth should be accommodated by more efficient
           use of land and buildings within existing centres. Local planning
           authorities should aim to increase the density of development, where
           appropriate.”

9.9    Paragraph 2.20 also says:

           “The Government is concerned to ensure that efficient use should be made
           of land within centres and elsewhere. Local planning authorities should
           formulate planning policies which encourage well-designed, and, where
           appropriate, higher-density, multi-storey development within and around
           existing centres,…”

9.10   It is considered that the submitted policy is compatible with this national
       objective to achieve high-density development in existing centres to a
       significant degree.

9.11   National guidance on tall buildings has recently been revised.63 This also
       recognises the importance of tall buildings – the opening line is:

           “Cities and their skylines evolve. In the right place, tall buildings can make
           positive contributions to city life.”

9.12   However, the guidance does also recognise that tall buildings can be
       unpopular, and their success is dependent on them being located in the right
       place, as well as being of an appropriate scale and design. But the guidance
       encourages local planning authorities to develop strategic policies to guide the
       location of tall buildings:

           “CABE and English Heritage advise local planning authorities to consider
           the scope for tall buildings, where they are a possibility, as part of strategic
           planning. This may include how they contribute to areas of change. In
           identifying locations where tall buildings would and would not be
           appropriate, local planning authorities should, as a matter of good practice,
           carry out a detailed urban design study.”

9.13   It is considered that the policy, in conjunction with the Urban Design
       Compendium advice, will contribute to the aims of this national guidance.

62
   Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing. DCLG (November 2006)
63
   Guidance on Tall Buildings. English Heritage & CABE (July 2007) -
http://www.cabe.org.uk/AssetLibrary/10173.pdf

                                            100
       However, unlike the Preferred Option that preceded it, it does not go so far as
       to identify locations. Ideally, they would have been included but it was
       concluded that more detailed work was required first and that this would be
       more appropriate in a Supplementary Planning Document instead of the Core
       Strategy. The Core strategy does, at least, identify the City Centre as a
       general location where tall buildings may be appropriate.

       Regional Policy

9.14   Policy YH2 A in the draft Regional Spatial Strategy seeks to increase urban
       densities and tall buildings would contribute to this.

9.15   The Panel Report has not suggested any changes to this policy that will affect
       its relevance.

       Sub-Regional Policy

9.16   There are no specific policies in sub-regional strategies such as the South
       Yorkshire Spatial Strategy or City Regional Development Program that are
       directly relevant to this submitted policy.

       Other Sheffield Policies

9.17   Work on the roll-forward of the City Centre Masterplan has considered the
       value of tall buildings in the City Centre, and is positive about the opportunities
       to deliver office accommodation in tall buildings, which will be highly visible
       and have the hallmarks of a dense and prosperous office district.

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)
9.18   The policy is compatible with the 2007 City Strategy. On page 33, when
       dealing with the spatial vision it states:

           “New development will be concentrated in the main urban area of Sheffield
           … Average densities will be increased within the existing built-up areas”.

       Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
       6)

       Core Strategy Objectives

9.19   The submitted policy will help to deliver the following objectives, as the policy
       connects with economic issues, transport, the use of land, design etc.:

          S1.1 Conditions created for a balanced, diverse and sustainable high-
           growth economy in the Sheffield city region;

          S2.1 The City Centre and complementary areas regenerated as the core
           location for major expansion of business, shopping, leisure and culture;



                                           101
          S6.2 A safer and more secure environment, minimising physical hazards
           and opportunities for crime.

          S9.2 High-density development focussed on the most accessible
           locations;

          S12.1 Previously developed land and existing buildings in urban areas
           reclaimed and re-used for all types of development, in preference to
           greenfield land;

          S15.1 High-quality and inclusiveness in all aspects of the design of new
           buildings and the spaces around and between them, with provision for
           everyone wishing to use them.

9.20   Tall buildings deliver a large amount of floorspace on a small amount of land.
       Also, as the vast majority of dwellings or business premises are located away
       from the ground floor, are less at risk from crimes such as burglary and
       vandalism.

       Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

9.21   This policy is geographically very locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any
       neighbouring authorities will have policies that will impact upon it.

       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
9.22   The emerging options provided a choice between having a promotional
       approach to tall buildings where appropriate, or having a relatively cautious
       approach.

       Option CC7a Tall buildings should be encouraged as far as possible in
       certain suitable areas of the City Centre.

9.23   This option would accord with the Urban Design Compendium (UDC) in that it
       encourages tall buildings in the City Centre, but only in certain locations where
       the character of the area and its location is considered appropriate.

9.24   The strengths of this option are:

       (a) Tall buildings make better use of limited land within the City Centre,
           allowing development to take place at higher densities.

       (b) Tall buildings make a statement about a City that can encourage
           investment. Their presence can give an impression of wealth, prosperity,
           dynamism and vibrancy.

       (c) The prominence of such buildings gives opportunities for bold design
           statements that can also send out very positive messages to people who
           are not familiar with the city.

9.25   The weakness of this option is:

                                           102
       (a) Tall buildings can be out of scale in some areas and can detract from
           existing, smaller scale quality buildings and settings. In the wrong places
           they can reduce the impact that Sheffield’s unique topography can have.

       Option CC7b The approach to tall buildings should be generally
       cautious.

9.26   The UDC, whilst accepting that there is scope for tall buildings in certain
       locations, also advocates a cautious approach to some degree. It suggests a
       measured approach where each proposal should be carefully considered
       against a set of criteria relating to topography, location and surrounding built
       form.

9.27   The strength of this option is:

       (a) The impact of such buildings on Sheffield, that currently has very few, and
           has a varied topography, needs to be carefully assessed. There is a role
           for tall buildings, but the general locations and scale of them needs to be
           right.

9.28   The weakness of this option is:

       (a) A cautious approach could mean that the accepted benefits of tall buildings
           that the city would achieve are limited. The city could be seen as cautious
           and not ready to embrace the opportunities that tall buildings can offer.

       Table 6 – Buildings of 10 or more Storeys Proposed or Under
       Construction in Sheffield, July 2007
                                                   No. of    Gross
                                                  Storeys commercial
            Location          Description                                 Developer
                                                          Floorspace
                                                            (sq. m.)
               Under Construction:
        'City Gate S1',     122 bed Tulip                               Tiger
        St Mary's Gate /    hotel                   11      20,100      Developments
        Young Street                                                    Ltd
        'I Quarter',      Redevelopment                                 Urban i (Blonk
        Lady’s Bridge /   and new build -           16      1,800       Street) Ltd
        Blonk Street      122 flats
        Heart of the City Restaurant /                                  CTP St
        - Registry Office café / bar and                                James / City
                                                    32      2,082
        Site              322                                           Lofts
                          apartments.
        Heart of the      Multi-storey car                              CTP St
        City, Arundel     park and                  10      11,400      James Ltd
        Gate              casino.
        Heart of the City Office building.                              CTP St
        - Offices Phase                             11      11,700      James Ltd
        3
                                            103
                                                      No. of    Gross
                                                     Storeys commercial
            Location            Description                                         Developer
                                                             Floorspace
                                                               (sq. m.)
        Office World          Office block and                                    McAleer and
        Site, Furnival        a hotel (254             17           25,200        Rushe Ltd
        Square                beds)
                Other Proposed:
        The Moor              Shops, offices,                                     RREEF (UK)
        Redevelopment,        apartments and           27           14,455        Ltd
        Charter Row           a car park
        Broad Lane /          Shops and B1                                        Watkin Jones
        Newcastle             (Business)                                          Group
        Street /              below 48                 10           2,320
        Rockingham            student flats
        Street
        Weston Tower,         Mainly                                              Hallana Ltd
        West Bar Green        residential              23           5,200
                              tower.
        Hanover Way /         Commercial                                          Barewise Ltd /
        Milton Street         uses and 233             22           2,500         (Lancaster)
                              apartments                                          Ltd
       Source: Sheffield City Council Major Development Schemes in Sheffield database.

       Schemes consisting of 10 or more storeys are included in this table. However, it should be
       stressed that this is not the accepted definition of a tall building – see paragraph 9.4

       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Planning Reasons

9.29   The submitted policy is effectively a combination of two emerging options.
       One option was to encourage tall buildings in suitable locations, the other to
       adopt a cautious approach. The policy is to encourage tall buildings in certain
       locations, but only if they meet certain criteria. So the two rejected elements
       of the options are considered to represent an overly cautious approach and a
       too positive approach, whereas the policy is a compromise, but one that is
       considered to deliver the advantages of tall buildings whilst limiting their
       potentially damaging visual impacts. It is also considered the option that best
       fits with the principles adopted in the UDC, although the UDC takes these
       principles further by identifying specific locations.

9.30   The policy has the advantages of the option CC7a, namely making better use
       of limited land within the City Centre, allowing development to take place at
       higher densities, providing large amounts of floorspace on City Centre sites
       that are often relatively small in size. This will help to achieve the aims of
       policies SH2, to deliver sufficient housing by building at high densities, as well
       as SB1 and SB3, that together seek to achieve a suitable and viable level of
       office development in the City Centre and it could be critical in achieving the
       required floorspace. It will also assist in the delivery of policy SCC2, to


                                               104
       achieve significant levels of office development in the most suitable City
       Centre locations.

9.31   This policy represents an efficient use of land, that is a scarce resource in the
       City Centre, where space is limited and land costs tend to be high.

9.32   Tall buildings are highly visible, and can make bold and confident statements
       about a city that can encourage investment, giving an impression of wealth,
       prosperity, dynamism and vibrancy, encouraging potential investors that
       Sheffield is a positive place in which to invest in new development, giving
       opportunities for bold design statements that can also send out positive
       messages about Sheffield, projecting a modern image and improving the
       visual impact of the City Centre by giving an air of importance, stature and
       prestige.

9.33   Tall buildings offer the potential for a wider range of land uses on a single
       footprint, and can assist in locating businesses effectively close to a range of
       different transport modes, close to other facilities and services.

9.34   Tall buildings, in relation to the role they can play as landmarks, can help
       ‘legibility’ and orientation within the city (page 61 of the Urban Design
       Compendium). High quality tall buildings in appropriate locations can add to
       the character of the City Centre, providing strategic landmarks and focal points
       to articulate parts of the city.

9.35   There are currently a limited number of tall buildings in Sheffield, so there is
       great potential to create landmark structures that can emphasize the dramatic
       contours of the City. But there are quite a lot of proposals in the table and a
       number do not re-inforce contours.

9.36   There could be advantages of tall buildings in terms of flood risk. Re-inforcing
       topography would locate tall buildings away from areas at risk of flooding
       though other criteria, e.g. relating to gateways and key routes in the valleys
       will be more at risk in some cases. Where a site does fall within a flood risk
       area and where there is less ground floor floorspace and more floorspace
       above ground, there will be less overall risk. The policy could have flooding
       implications relating to water run-off, but there could also be advantages that
       building up means less hard surfacing at ground level. This will be addressed
       in the City Policies document, currently in Preferred Option PR4.

9.37   The resulting policy is criteria-based rather than spatial but the criteria are
       mainly about location. The policy is proposed as an intermediate stage to a
       more fully spatial statement in the related Supplementary Planning Document.
       This will supersede the specific locations currently proposed in the Urban
       Design Compendium and take account of more recent needs and
       opportunities.

9.38   The submitted policy would enable the strategic aspects of the UDC to feature
       in the formal planning framework. The tall buildings aspect of the UDC would
       be reviewed before becoming the subject of an SPD.


                                          105
       Sustainability Appraisal

9.39   The policy is the only one of the options that delivers any significant
       sustainability, even though it all has some negative impacts. Tall buildings will
       aid economic prosperity, as higher employment numbers are achievable if
       buildings are built taller, as site densities will be greater. Tall buildings are
       also prominent landmarks that create prestigious locations for businesses and
       give a positive impression of economic prosperity that help to achieve the
       sustainability aim of A strong economy with good job opportunities available to
       the whole community. Taller buildings mean higher densities and more
       housing units, which will increase overall housing availability. Greater site
       density can reduce average development costs allowing improved quality
       and/or reduced costs. Tall buildings are likely to be more secure from break-
       ins than low-rise housing. Taller buildings mean more residents and workers
       in the City Centre, which will help to support cultural, leisure and recreation
       facilities. Building taller at a higher density is a more efficient use of land and
       could enable the redevelopment of difficult sites that are costly to re-use. Tall
       buildings are very prominent, so a good design has a greater impact. They
       create development at higher densities that mean more people can be served
       by the physical infrastructure.

       Equality Appraisal

9.40   More jobs and housing in the City Centre is more sustainable, as this is the
       most accessible part of the City and well served by public transport, reducing
       reliance on private transport, which is often required by those on low incomes.

       Consultation Responses

9.41   There was virtually unanimous support for the element of the Emerging Option
       that was taken forward as part of the submitted policy, to generally promote
       tall buildings in the City Centre. This included backing from Sheffield One,
       Sheffield First for Investment and Yorkshire Forward. The latter two in
       particular endorsed the economic benefits of tall buildings through improved
       image and efficient use of land in limited supply. YF also emphasised the
       need to ensure suitable mixing within developments.

9.42   English Heritage offered qualified support for tall buildings. Their comments
       were:

          “The overriding consideration will be whether the location is suitable for a
          tall building in terms of its effect on the historic environment at a city-wide
          as well as a local level. We commend the guidance on tall buildings,
          produced by English Heritage and CABE, for consideration, which outlines
          the issues which should be addressed in any Policy for tall buildings. The
          City needs a clear strategy setting out where tall buildings will and will not
          be acceptable and identifying key vistas across the city which
          ought to be safeguarded.”

9.43   This advice has been taken on board in terms of the submitted policy, as the
       policy sets out the criteria that will be used to judge the suitability of a location

                                            106
       for a tall building. The detail will be included in the SPD referred to in
       paragraph 9.13.

9.44   Consultation on the Preferred Options resulted in only one objection, from
       consultants Development Land and Planning, that suggested the policy did not
       need to set out the locations for tall buildings, and that the criteria were
       sufficient. The City Council agreed with this comment to some degree in that
       the locations are not included in the Core Strategy, but there is still a need to
       do this in the proposed SPD

       Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

9.45   Tall buildings are becoming part of the fabric of many major UK cities, and
       there are economic advantages to be gained by the development of well-
       designed and appropriately located high buildings. They should, therefore, be
       encouraged, but with a note of caution to avoid the negative impacts that they
       can have.

       Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)
9.46   The policy will be delivered by:

          Determining planning applications in accordance with the criteria set out
           and applying the principles of the Urban Design Compendium. This will
           include actively seeking taller buildings in locations satisfying the specified
           criteria, also in line with the proposed SPD.

9.47   The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
       policy SCC8. This will need to be considered further as part of developing a
       monitoring framework for the submission version of the City Policies document
       (see Preferred Option PUD5).

       Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
9.48   The policy allows for a large amount of flexibility in terms of determining what
       is required from tall buildings and where they should be provided. This in turn
       implies little risk, other than the risk that poor quality design could create a
       negative rather than positive impact, so the need for good quality design of
       such prominent buildings is essential. This will be covered in the City Policies
       document – Preferred Option PUD5 deals with tall buildings.

       Conclusion
9.49   Tall buildings will be a very major feature of the city scene over the period
       covered by the Core Strategy and can make a major contribution to objectives
       for the economy, transport, use of resources and design. But they need to
       promoted as part of a bigger strategy and the policy represents the beginnings
       of such a framework.




                                           107
108
10 TRANSPORT IN THE CITY CENTRE
       Introduction
10.1   Transport provision and the efficiency of the transport infrastructure are
       crucially important to the City Centre. The City Centre will be successful and
       deliver the Core Strategy policy objectives if people can effectively travel in,
       out and through the City Centre. So options for transport generally have major
       implications for the role and effectiveness of the City Centre.

10.2   At the time of the Emerging Options, no specific City Centre transport issues
       were identified, as they were dealt with as part of the citywide transport
       options. This view was revised for the Preferred Options, which did include
       options for specific City Centre transport policies, in response to various
       comments received during public consultation.

       Policy SCC9 Transport in the City Centre
       The transport network into and within the City Centre will be managed to
       enable the development of its core city functions. Increased demand for
       trips will be managed by measures including:

          (a) public transport improvements including:

                 (1) a series of midi-interchanges to meet the needs of bus users
                     at priority locations including:

                           Moorfoot
                           The New Retail Quarter (Charter Square)
                           Howard Street/ Sheffield Station

                 (2) bus-based park-and-ride links on the main radial routes at
                     the edge of the main urban area to serve the City Centre

                 (3) City Centre shuttle bus service providing connections
                     between major destinations in the City Centre

                 (4) improved penetration of the City Centre by public transport;

          (b) including the area inside the new Northern Inner Relief Road
              within the City Centre Controlled Parking Zone;

          (c) development of car club hubs at the following locations:

                 (1) Arundel Street
                 (2) Charles Street
                 (3) Fitzwilliam Street
                 (4) St James Street
                 (5) Victoria Street
                 (6) Brown Street
                 (7) Millsands
                                          109
                  (8) Moorfoot;

           (d) Providing for 9,500 public short-stay parking spaces but
               restricting long-stay public and private car parking and providing
               long-stay park-and-ride facilities on the edge of the urban area

           (e) Helping all users of the City Centre to understand and find their
               way round the City Centre, including extending the Connect
               Sheffield project in conjunction with development in the New
               Retail Quarter and The Moor.

       Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
       National Policy

10.3   The most relevant national guidance to this policy is Planning Policy Guidance
       13: Transport (PPG13).64 It requires local authorities to identify interchange
       improvements that need to be made. The submitted policy proposes new
       midi-interchanges that will serve bus users. Paragraph 72 also identifies the
       need for:

           “good interchanges, which matches the pattern of travel demand”

10.4   Paragraph 59 promotes the use of park-and-ride schemes:

           “Park and ride schemes, in appropriate circumstances, can help promote
           more sustainable travel patterns, both at local and strategic levels, and
           improve the accessibility and attractiveness of town centres.”

10.5   Paragraph 28 encourages good connectivity within the City Centre:

           “New development should help to create places that connect with each
           other sustainably, providing the right conditions to encourage walking,
           cycling and the use of public transport.”

       Regional Policy

10.6   The draft Regional Spatial Strategy, in Policy T1 B, requires:

           “Transport authorities to make the optimum use of the existing highway
           network to address congestion and encourage modal shift, with road space
           being actively managed to support movement by modes other than the
           private car.”

10.7   Car clubs, as well as public transport improvements are encouraged by T1 D:




64
  Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport. Department for Communities and Local Government
(March 2001)

                                             110
           “The growth of congestion should be addressed through positive measures
           including … encouraging of travel awareness campaigns, car clubs and car
           sharing.”

10.8   Parking strategies are advocated in T1 E:

           “Car use, particularly in peak periods, should be managed by local
           authorities taking a consistent approach to the formulation of parking
           strategies”

10.9   Policy T2 requires the use of parking policies, specifically parking standards,
       Controlled Parking Zones, a shift from long-stay to short-stay parking and the
       use of park and ride:

           “The Region will have a consistent approach to parking. Parking strategies
           will include:

               A The use of maximum parking standards for new developments in line
               with Table 16.5

               B The Use of Controlled Parking Zones

               C A progressive reduction in long stay parking (other than at railway
               stations to serve rail users and at other locations serving a park and
               ride function) and transfer of some space to short stay, subject to
               consideration of possible implications for traffic congestion

               D A reduction of on-street parking to maximise pedestrianisation with
               high quality walking and cycling networks and environmental
               improvements

               E Park and ride facilities coupled with increased use of public transport
               through service level improvements”

10.10 Bus based park and ride is also promoted by Policy T3 B:

           “Provision of strategic bus- and rail-based Park £ Ride/ Parkway stations
           with associated high quality and reliable service provision”

10.11 None of the recommended changes made in the Panel Report will affect the
      relevance of these policies to the submitted Core Strategy policy.

       Sub-Regional Policy

10.12 The policy has been drawn up in conjunction with the Second South Yorkshire
      Local Transport Plan 2006 – 2011 (LTP2),65 produced by the South Yorkshire
      Local Transport Plan Partnership, a joint group of the four south Yorkshire
      authorities and the Passenger Transport Authority. For example, the 5 Year
      Action Plan in paragraph 8.24 promotes car clubs.
65
  The Second South Yorkshire Local Transport Plan 2006 – 2011. South Yorkshire Local Transport
Plan Partnership. http://www.southyorks.gov.uk/index.asp?id=186

                                             111
10.13 The Local Transport Plan gives priority to Key Routes that, in Sheffield’s case,
      largely converge on the City Centre. The policy complements this by helping
      to provide for movement of people and vehicles once in the City Centre. The
      Local Transport Plan leaves this issue to be resolved by the City Centre
      Transport Strategy.

       Other Sheffield Policies

10.14 The City Centre Masterplan was produced in 2000. Work is underway on an
      update of this, but one of the four underlying strategic objectives remains valid
      today, namely improving accessibility to the City Centre by all modes of
      transport.

10.15 Work on the roll-forward of the City Centre Masterplan has identified the need
      to make it easier for pedestrians to find their way around the City Centre, with
      an integrated wayfinding system, linking public and private transport and
      pedestrian information in a user-friendly format. The scheme serves to
      improve walking within the pedestrian dominated City Centre and ensure that
      people can navigate easily to their destination. Consultation with the Sheffield
      100 Forum on the Masterplan review,66 (page 11) has highlighted significant
      support for enhanced public transport including what was referred to as a City
      Centre ‘hoppa’ bus loop. An improvement to interchanges was also
      supported.

10.16 The Masterplan is expected to put the case for considering the feasibility of a
      City Centre shuttle bus service that will enhance connectivity and tackle real
      and perceived barriers to movement around the City Centre, especially for
      those with mobility impairments. A common theme from consultations in
      Sheffield is that certain relatively short movements around the City Centre are
      problematic by foot, and are not well served by convenient and affordable
      public transport services. Particular problems are noted for the following
      journeys:

          Sheffield Midland Station / Sheaf Valley to Millennium Square / The Moor /
           New Retail Quarter

          The Moor to Castlegate

          Bus Station to The Moor / Castlegate

10.17 These difficulties are generally compounded by the topography of the City
      Centre and the elongated shape of the current City Centre core along its
      north-south axis.

10.18 To tackle these issues it is proposed that consideration be given to a bespoke
      shuttle service that offers a high frequency operation between key City Centre
      locations using a high quality comfortable fleet of vehicles. Whilst a similar
      service was operated in the past and withdrawn, it is considered that

66
  Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Review and Roll-Forward – Sheffield 100 Workshop. EDAW
(2006)

                                             112
       subsequent changes to the built environment and economy in the City Centre
       suggests that a clipper service should be reintroduced.

10.19 A key issue so far identified is the need for improved accessibility within and to
      the City Centre. Other likely recommendations are the adoption of a strategy
      emphasising the management and control of traffic, supported by a high
      quality public transport system. Demand management is recommended in
      parallel with improvements to the public transport infrastructure.

10.20 On page 14 of the report of consultation there is support expressed for
      reducing car traffic in the City Centre and improving pedestrian signage and
      legibility, which also support the aims of the submitted policy, particularly
      sections (b) and (e).

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)
10.21 A Big Ambition in the 2007 City Strategy is to establish an excellent public
      transport system. On page 18 it states:

          “Sheffield First Partnership is committed to exploring all available options
          to improve public transport services across and into the city”

       And on the following page:

          “We will underpin these improvements through effective spatial planning
          through the Regional Spatial Strategy and the Sheffield Development
          Framework.”

10.22 This demonstrates a close link between the City Strategy and the submitted
      policy.

       Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
       6)

       Core Strategy Objectives

             S7.1 Provision for transport and other services to improve accessibility
              for people getting to work and services

             S7.2 Improved access by sustainable transport to areas for economic
              development.

             S8.2 Effective and efficient movement around the city, making best use
              of routes and ensuring development would not increase congestion
              unacceptably.

             S10.1 Improvements to public transport supported and energy-efficient
              and low-polluting modes of travel given priority




                                          113
             S10.2 Walking and cycling encouraged by design of places and routes
              and by the location of facilities.

       Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

10.23 There are no significant elements of adjoining local authority plans that have
      any impact on this submitted policy.

       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)

10.24 The issue was introduced as a Preferred Option, following comments at the
      Emerging Options stage, so no alternative options were specifically
      suggested. However, the de facto alternative option would be to have no
      specific policy to manage the City Centre transport network.

       Option: The transport network in the City Centre will be managed to
       enable the development of its core city functions. Increased demand for
       trips will be managed.

10.25 The strengths of this option are:

       (a) Improvements to the transport network will help to encourage more use of
           public transport and improve accessibility to the City Centre.

       (b) An efficient City Centre transport network will improve prosperity for City
           Centre businesses by increasing the number of people travelling into the
           City Centre.

10.26 The weakness of this option is:

       (a) This is a demand management policy that can run contrary to making the
           City Centre more attractive to visitors, for example by car.

       Option: No specific management of the transport network in the City
       Centre.

10.27 The strength of this option is:

       (a) Restrictions on private transport can have adverse short-term economic
           impacts.

10.28 The weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) The efficient operation of the transport network in and around the City
           Centre is unlikely if management of the network is not undertaken.

       (b) Congestion is likely to increase, which has detrimental health, resource
           and longer-term economic effects.




                                          114
       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Planning Reasons

10.29 The advantage the rejected option would be that there could be some short-
      term benefits for car-borne traffic into the City Centre in the form of more
      parking and less competition for road space with public transport. However, it
      is considered that the increase in car traffic and the resultant congestion would
      significantly counteract such benefits. This would be overwhelmingly the case
      in relation to peak-period travel.

10.30 There is a limit to the capacity of any highway network, so transport policies
      must focus on the most efficient use of the existing network. Increased the
      capacity of the network to any significant degree is not programmed once the
      northern section of the Inner Relief Road is completed, so the realistic
      scenario must be the management of the existing infrastructure.

10.31 It is vital that the regeneration aims for the City Centre and the city as a whole
      are not stifled by the inability of the transport network to cope with the
      increased number of journeys that more employment, residents and visitors
      will bring. So management of the network will be required to ensure that
      people can still get around the city adequately to access jobs, homes, shops
      and leisure attractions. A wide range of measures is required to have
      sufficient impact and ensure that the best use is made of finite road space and
      cycle, pedestrian, rail, tram, bus and other transport modes.

10.32 Public transport improvements are the best way to make full use of the City’s
      wider transport infrastructure. Appropriate and optimal provision will be made
      for car use, balanced with the needs of public transport.

10.33 The proposed midi-interchanges will improve accessibility of City Centre
      destinations for bus users. The City Centre Transport Strategy
      Implementation Plan 2003 identified constraints on bus operation which can
      make accessibility in the City Centre for bus users difficult. The main
      interchange at Pond Street is not accessible for all parts of the City Centre and
      therefore the Masterplan identified the need to re-route and extend services to
      more accessible locations. Developing new midi-interchanges close to key
      regeneration areas of the City Centre is key to this. The sites identified are at
      existing clusters of stops. It is aimed to implement these midi-interchanges by
      2011.

10.34 The Moorfoot location was chosen on account of the concentration of shops in
      the area and will serve the new development along The Moor including the
      new markets. The NRQ interchange will help make the new core shopping
      developments more accessible to users of public transport. The Howard
      Street location is relatively near to the existing Pond Street interchange but is
      intended to improve connections between bus and the railway station, which
      are important to connecting the city with its wider region and beyond.

10.35 The park-and-ride links are from the facilities identified in policy ST8. They,
      too, will need to connect as closely as possible with City Centre destinations.

                                          115
10.36 The Shuttle service is another specific element of the overall strategy for
      improving public transport penetration of the City Centre (see also
      subparagraph (a)(4)). It is due to be implemented in October 2007. It is being
      tendered by SYPTE and will provide a free bus service at a 10-minute
      frequency connecting major areas of the City Centre. The service will take the
      form of a loop around the City Centre, which will improve penetration of public
      transport in the Centre. The purpose is to enhance connectivity and improve
      access particularly for those with mobility impairments. It recognises that short
      journeys around the City Centre can be difficult particularly due to topography
      and the extended nature of the Centre. The aim is to improve movement
      around the City Centre for public transport users.

10.37 The reference to improved penetration picks up the range of other initiatives
      that might be taken to increase accessibility. The City Centre Transport
      Strategy Implementation Plan 2003 identified improved penetration of the City
      Centre by public transport as paramount to enabling people to get to where
      they want to go now and in. Proposals include re-routing and extensions to
      existing services to tie in with the new midi interchanges and new
      developments. It also includes a series of bus gates at key points. The aim is
      to improve accessibility to key areas of the City Centre.

10.38 The proposal to bring the whole of the area within the Inner Relief Road into
      the City Centre Controlled Parking Zone is to ensure that all on-street parking
      within the City Centre is subject to the same charges and restrictions. This will
      provide continuity and a clear system for users. This will be implemented by
      2011.

10.39 Car clubs are membership-based schemes providing short-term (pay-by-the-
      hour) car hire from convenient locations. They provide cars for hire to
      businesses and members of the public and have been set up by local
      authorities in conjunction with operators in a number of areas in the UK. The
      aim of a car club is to reduce the need for vehicle ownership by business and
      the public and to encourage more selective and sustainable use of cars. The
      City Centre is the initial focus for car clubs in Sheffield and is the area where
      they will be most viable. The club with the first four named locations for
      vehicles was launched in April 2007 and the other locations are expected to
      be operating by 2008/9.

10.40 The locations take into account that it is essential that the cars are placed
      conveniently for users and they must therefore be central to existing and
      future employment areas and residential developments. A Traffic Regulation
      Order is used to implement on-street spaces and enables their enforcement.

10.41 Providing short-stay parking is important for enabling a more accessible city by
      all modes, and supporting the shopping, leisure and other non-employment
      regeneration projects that are under way. The City Centre Transport Strategy
      Implementation Plan 2003 shows that large, high quality car parks are
      required which serve each of the City Centre districts. The Sheffield City
      Centre Parking Strategy was developed as part of the City Centre Masterplan.
      It identifies that 9,500 parking spaces are required to support the regeneration

                                          116
      of the city centre and these are due to be implemented by 2011. Two new
      multi-storey car parks are being developed to serve the NRQ. The case for
      these is further explained in the Transport Background Report in relation to
      policy ST8.

10.42 To get most benefit from their visit people need to be able to find their way
      round easily and quickly. This can contribute significantly to important first
      impressions of the city. It means signing to reduce the distances travelled to
      find car parks, providing more user-focussed public transport and creating a
      more coherent and welcoming ‘public realm’. Connect Sheffield is a project,
      which aims to achieve this for all modes of travel.

      Sustainability Appraisal

10.43 The preferred option performs significantly better than the rejected option
      overall. Traffic congestion has an adverse impact on businesses, as workers
      and customers spend time travelling, rather than being productive. So
      improving accessibility in the City Centre will have a positive impact on
      business, which might otherwise look to locate elsewhere. . Reducing
      congestion will reduce vehicle emissions and air pollution that would build up
      in the City Centre, that would otherwise have an adverse impact on health.
      Improving access to the City Centre will encourage people to use the cultural,
      leisure and recreation facilities that the City Centre provides. Provision of
      improved public transport facilities encourages the use of sustainable public
      transport and makes better use of the transport network.

      Equality Appraisal

10.44 Improving public transport facilities in the City Centre will help those with low
      access to private transport, including as those on low incomes. The LTP2
      (paragraph 7.8) recognises that effective public transport provision is important
      to ensure that certain people do not become excluded from accessing
      facilities:

          “Poor access to work, education, health-care and other facilities can be a
          significant contributor to social exclusion.”

      Consultation Responses

10.45 This is a new option that was not presented for consultation at the Emerging
      Option stage.

10.46 There were some objections to the Preferred Option, PCC6. One requested a
      cross-City Centre, low cost public transport option, to allow speedy movement
      across the hilly and dispersed central shopping area. A proposal for a shuttle
      bus service has been included in the submitted policy. The Green Party
      requested Green Travel Plans to include all major employers in the City
      Centre and the encouragement of car pools for essential car users. The
      extent of Travel Plans and Car Clubs will be further developed through the
      Transport chapter of the City Policies document, and the submitted Core
      Strategy policy sets out locations to act as car club hubs. Greater integration

                                         117
      of cycling / walking with other transport modes was requested. These
      comments are considered to be about details of the content of the policy,
      rather than objections to the policy itself.

      Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

10.47 This grounds for the choice of policy were overwhelming, following from the
      SDF objectives and Transport policies in Part 2 of the Core Strategy. The
      decisions have revolved more around how the overall aim of the policy should
      be achieved. The measures included are consistent with a range of other
      strategies, particularly the LTP2, and will help to deliver the aims of many
      other City Centre policies in the Core Strategy.

      Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)
10.48 The policy will be implemented by:

         Delivery through the City Centre Transport Strategy and Local Transport
          Plan 2 (LTP2).

         Ensuring the local Area Action Plans and the City Centre Masterplan
          include the measures set out in the policy that are relevant to the area.

         Determining planning applications that contribute to the improvement
          measures set out in the policy.

10.49 The specific target for policy SCC9 is for the listed schemes to be completed
      by 2011 but other comparable measures may be introduced over the longer
      term in the light of progress during the currency of the present Local Transport
      Plan. Delivery of the schemes listed in policy SCC9 is also an important factor
      in determining progress against several of the targets for other Transport
      policies in the Core Strategy. The relevant targets and indicators are
      described in the Transport Background Report (see, in particular, the
      Monitoring and Implementation sections for policies ST1a, ST3, ST4, ST5,
      ST6 and ST8).

      Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
10.50 The use of the LTP2, as the main prioritising programme for funding, is crucial
      for delivery. LTP2 commitments to the improvements set out in the policy
      means that there is good reason to be confident that they are likely to be
      delivered during the timescale of the SDF.

      Conclusion
10.51 Preceding chapters in this report have set out the economic, social, cultural
      and educational importance of the City Centre. But these policies canbe
      achieved effectively and the benefits maximised only if people can easily
      access the facilities that the City Centre can provide. So the transport network
      in and around the City Centre is crucial to the whole success of the City
      Centre and the policies relating to it in the Sheffield Development Framework.
                                         118
10.52 There are physical and environmental constraints in the City Centre that mean
      large-scale building improvements to the road, rail and tram networks are
      unlikely in the foreseeable future. So the emphasis must be on making the
      best use of the transport network that is already in place. The submitted
      policy is considered to achieve this as far as possible, and delivery
      mechanisms, through the LTP2 and the planning system, are well established
      to deliver the necessary improvements.




                                       119
120
11 PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT IN THE CITY CENTRE
       Introduction
11.1   This is an issue that was not included in the Emerging Options but was
       introduced in the Preferred Options, as a result of comments that emphasised
       the importance of pedestrian areas. Such areas could improve the
       attractiveness and vibrancy of the City Centre and improve the overall capacity
       of the City Centre for the movement of people.

       Policy SCC10 Pedestrian Environment in the City Centre
       A Pedestrian Priority Zone in which a high-quality environment will allow
       priority for the safe, convenient and comfortable movement of
       pedestrians within and through the area, will be established in the
       following areas of the City Centre:

          (a) Heart of the City
          (b) Fargate
          (c) The Moor/ NRQ
          (d) the Cultural Industries Quarter
          (e) Castlegate/ Victoria Quays
          (f) Devonshire Street
          (g) the University of Sheffield (Portobello/ Portobello Street)
          (h) routes to St Vincent’s
          (i) West Bar
          (j) Sheaf Square/ Howard Street
          (k) Kelham/ Neepsend.

       Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
       National Policy

11.2   The policy will help to deliver the aims of national planning guidance, as set
       out in PPG13 in particular. One of the objectives of PPG13, set out in
       paragraph 8 is:

          “give priority to people over ease of traffic movement and plan to provide
          more road space to pedestrians, cyclists and public transport in town
          centres”

11.3   Paragraph 65 acknowledges the economic benefits that can accrue from
       improving pedestrian movements:

          “roadspace might be reallocated to pedestrians, cyclists and public
          transport in order to accommodate and facilitate the renaissance of towns
          and cities.”

11.4   This is further endorsed in paragraph 67:


                                          121
          “Within town centres and other areas with a mixture of land uses, priority
          should be given to people over traffic. Well designed pedestrianisation and
          pedestrian priority schemes generally prove popular and commercially
          successful, and local authorities should actively consider traffic calming
          and the reallocation of road space to promote safe walking and cycling and
          to give priority to public transport.”

       Regional Policy

11.5   Policy T1 D (page 61) of the draft Regional Spatial Strategy states that:

          “The growth of congestion should be addressed through positive measures
          including:

          … Improved facilities for cyclists and pedestrians”

11.6   Policy T2 D seeks:

          “A reduction of on-street parking to maximise pedestrianisation with high
          quality walking and cycling networks and environmental improvements.”

11.7   The submitted Core Strategy policy supports both of these proposals in the
       RSS, which are not recommended for significant alteration in the Panel
       Report.

       Sub-Regional Policy

11.8   The LTP2 is committed to improving the pedestrian environment. Paragraph
       8.4 on page 129 says:

          “We must implement measures that make the existing pedestrian and
          cycling environment more attractive and conducive.”

11.9   Part of the 5 year action plan in the LTP2 (paragraph 8.24) states that:-

          “Support local accessibility improvements through improvements to the
          pedestrian environment and network of walk routes”

11.10 The submitted policy will help to deliver these improvements in the City
      Centre.

       Other Sheffield Policies

11.11 Initial work on the roll-forward of the City Centre Masterplan identifies a need
      to make it easier to move around the City Centre and promote popular walking
      routes that link-up the city’s key landmarks and facilities. A hierarchy of
      pedestrian routes is proposed which coincide with the main nodes of activity
      and are continuous and well marked. Areas of focus are Victoria Quays,
      Castlegate, Fargate, Heart of the City, The Moor and Moorfoot, Howard St,
      Barkers Pool and Devonshire Green / University Precinct.


                                         122
11.12 Consultation with the Sheffield 100 Forum on the Masterplan proposals
      produced general support for extending the pedestrian network and reclaiming
      road space for pedestrians, which supports the submitted policy.67

11.13 Sheffield’s Plan for Transport includes objectives to “Continue to provide
      pedestrian priority and redistribution of space to pedestrians in the City
      Centre” and to “Improve the pedestrian environment creating attractive and
      safe walking routes within local centres and the City Centre”.

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)
11.14 The spatial vision for the City Strategy acknowledges the need to make
      provision for pedestrians (page 33), so there is a consistency between the two
      policy documents.

       Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
       6)

       Core Strategy Objectives

11.15 The submitted policy is consistent with the following objectives of the Core
      Strategy:

              S1.3 Environments created, improved and conserved to attract
               business investment, including high-technology manufacturing and
               knowledge-based services;

              S6.2 A safer and more secure environment, minimising physical
               hazards and opportunities for crime;

              S8.2 Effective and efficient movement around the city, making best use
               of routes and ensuring development would not increase congestion
               unacceptably;

              S10.2 Walking and cycling encouraged by design of places and routes
               and by the location of facilities;

              S15.1 High-quality and inclusiveness in all aspects of the design of
               new buildings and the spaces around and between them, with provision
               for everyone wishing to use them.

       Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

       This policy is geographically very locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any
       neighbouring authorities will have policies that will impact upon it.




67
  Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Review and Roll-Forward – Sheffield 100 Workshop. EDAW
(2006)

                                             123
       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
11.16 As the issue was introduced at the Preferred Options stage, no alternative
      options were specifically consulted on. However, the de facto alternative
      option would be to have no specific policy to promote a Pedestrian Priority
      Zone. The choice of routes is related to the choice of areas for regeneration
      particularly for shopping, education, leisure and housing.

       Option: A Pedestrian Preference Zone in which a high quality
       environment will allow the safe, convenient and comfortable movement
       of pedestrians within and through the area, will be established in the
       City Centre.

11.17 The strengths of this option are:

       (a) The transformation of the City Centre will be assisted by improving the
           environment for workers and visitors.

       (b) The attractiveness and viability of the City Centre will be improved if there
           is a good quality pedestrian environment in which it is easy and safe to
           walk around. Connectivity improves the collective value of the City Centre
           assets.

11.18 The weakness of this option is:

       (a) Improving the pedestrian environment can be at the expense of vehicle
           movement.

       Option: No Pedestrian Preference Zone will be promoted in the City
       Centre.

11.19 The strength of this option is:

       (a) Some restrictions on vehicle movements that could result from an
           improved pedestrian environment will be avoided.

11.20 The main weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) The economic benefits resulting from improving the environment for
           workers and visitors will be lost.

       (b) The sustainability benefits resulting from a safer pedestrian environment
           will not be achieved.

       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)
       Planning Reasons

11.21 The attractiveness and viability of the City Centre will be improved if there is a
      good quality pedestrian environment. Visitors and shoppers, in particular, will
      be attracted to the City Centre if it is easy and safe to walk around. Many

                                          124
       shoppers prefer a varied and attractive indoor and outdoor environment to
       improve their shopping experience. Improved connectivity between the
       various City Centre attractions gives them a greater collective value.

11.22 People will also be encouraged to work in the City Centre and companies will
      find it easier to attract employees to work for their businesses if the working
      environment, including the surrounding pedestrian area, is attractive. The
      same can be said for clients of businesses. Such conditions can deliver
      significant business advantages, and this is why business leaders often give
      great importance to providing an attractive setting for business premises.

11.23 The alternative approach may have short-term benefits in safeguarding road
      space for vehicles but the loss to quality of the environment would be longer-
      term and would detract not only from the appearance and character of the
      centre but also from its economic attractiveness (see objective S1.3).
      Pedestrian movement within the centre requires less space than vehicular
      trips and, for most people, is entirely viable for short trips. Complementary
      provision for vehicular movement is made, for which sufficient provision is
      made in policy SCC9. The planning benefits are described in more detail in
      the next section on sustainability.

11.24 The Heart of the City, Fargate and The Moor/ NRQ are then locations
      attracting the largest number of visitors and provision for pedestrians will
      greatly improve the experience of the many people coming to these areas
      both from within the city and the wider region.

11.25 The Cultural Industries Quarter and Portobello areas adjoin universities and
      there is a significant amount of student pedestrian movement. Provision for
      pedestrians in these areas will complement initiatives to encourage those
      working at the universities to use public transport. The Devonshire Street
      corridor is both a significant shopping street and link with student areas.

11.26 These areas and most of the others listed in the policy are significant
      regeneration areas with significant housing areas and opportunities for
      creating better pedestrian environments. These include Castlegate/ Victoria
      Quays, West Bar, the St Vincent’s area and Kelham/ Neepsend (see also
      policy SCC6 on where housing will be a significant use).

11.27 Sheaf Square/ Howard Street will continue to be a key link from the railway
      station to the Heart of the City and a vital gateway as well as artery for visitrs
      coming by train.

       Sustainability Appraisal

11.28 The submitted policy performs significantly better than the rejected option, by
      encouraging a healthier way of enjoying the City Centre, by creating a better
      pedestrian environment and greater separation of traffic and pedestrians.
      Improving pedestrian movements and the pedestrian environment in the City
      Centre will make it more attractive to workers, which should help businesses
      to attract new employees. Pedestrian-friendly routes may encourage more
      people to walk into and around the City Centre, which is generally better for

                                           125
      people’s health, and pedestrian routes are safer by separating pedestrians
      from vehicles. It will also reduce vehicular traffic and the resultant vehicle
      emissions and air pollution, with further benefits for health. Good pedestrian
      routes will encourage less reliance on other, less sustainable, transport
      methods, and generally help to make better use of the transport network. New
      pedestrian areas and routes are likely to be designed to a high quality.

      Equality Appraisal

11.29 Pedestrian friendly routes make it easier to move into and around the City
      Centre, without relying on private transport, which will benefit people on low
      incomes, who may rely on walking more so than others. Better pedestrian
      routes make it easier and safer for those with physical disabilities to move
      around, as well as physically frail or vulnerable people and dependent children
      and their carers.

      Consultation Responses

11.30 There was general support for the equivalent Preferred Option (PCC7). It was
      supported by the University of Sheffield, who suggested the addition of part of
      their campus in the Portobello / Portobello Street area and this has been
      included in the submitted policy.

      Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

11.31 The policy scores strongly on grounds of sustainability, effective use of limited
      route capacity, environmental quality and economic attraction. Consultation
      on the City Centre Masterplan, in particular, has highlighted the need to
      improve connections between buildings and localities in the City Centre.
      Much of this can be achieved by making it easier for pedestrian movements,
      which are the easiest and most convenient way for most people to cover short
      distances within the City Centre.

      Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)
11.32 The policy will be implemented by:

         Delivering transport improvements with the help of funding and priorities
          set through the Local Transport Plan 2, 2006-2011.

         Producing and implementing the proposed Pedestrian Strategy

         The use of planning obligations to deliver improvements to the pedestrian
          environment, as suggested in PPG13 in paragraph 84. This is currently
          taken up in the Preferred Options for the City Policies (Preferred Option
          PPO1). Significant improvements will be achieved through the New Retail
          Quarter.

         Identifying the Pedestrian Priority Zones in Actions Plans and the City
          Centre Masterplan, and measures to deliver them.


                                         126
          Determining planning applications in the areas affected by Pedestrian
           Priority Zones in order to secure contributions towards their provision
           where appropriate and ensure new development does not detract from the
           quality of the pedestrian environment (see the reference to planning
           obligations above).

11.33 The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
      policy SCC10. Delivery of the schemes listed in the policy, however, an
      important factor in determining progress against the target for policy ST4 (a
      4% increase in walking trips as a proportion of all trips into the City Centre
      from 2008 to 2013). This is set out in more detail in the Transport Background
      Report.

       Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
11.34 A Pedestrian PriorityZone could have an adverse affect on vehicular
      movements of all non-pedestrian transport methods. This could have an
      adverse affect on all movements through the City Centre, but the areas are
      not major vehicle routes, so the impact is likely to be small.

11.35 There may be some risks associated with the availability of resources, but the
      policy will ensure that the priorities are clear when resources are available. An
      improved pedestrian environment has already been achieved in many parts of
      the City Centre recently, and areas such as the Peace Gardens and Barker’s
      Pool have received support from various quarters. It is the City Council’s view
      that this support has created some momentum that can be carried forward to
      continue further improvements to the City Centre.

11.36 The policy will also be flexible in that it doesn’t preclude taking opportunities
      that arise to incorporate other routes if these are considered suitable.

       Conclusion
11.37 There are many sustainability advantages of increasing pedestrian movement
      within the City Centre. The most successful and popular parts of Sheffield, as
      with most and other City Centres, tend to be areas that are pedestrian-friendly.
      For those able to move around in this way, pedestrian movement is the
      easiest and most efficient way of moving around the City Centre, so it should
      be made as easy and desirable as possible, whilst also balancing the needs of
      other modes of transport.




                                           127
128
12 OPEN SPACE AND RIVERSIDES IN THE CITY CENTRE
       Introduction
12.1   The environmental quality of city centres is a crucial element of their success.
       Businesses will locate to city centres only if the quality of the environment is of
       an acceptable standard. Sheffield City Council has improved its City Centre
       public spaces to a large degree in recent years, a major factor in recent
       improved economic performance. As more workers, visitors, shoppers and
       residents are present in the City Centre, there is more pressure on existing
       open spaces and an increased need to protect and enhance them.

12.2   Concerns have been expressed about the lack of open space and especially
       of greenspace in the City Centre. Open space is particularly important in the
       City Centre, as it serves a large number of people who visit the Centre, and
       not just local residents. So there is a need to also provide more open space to
       meet the extra needs of the people using the City Centre.

12.3   Rivers and riversides can provide passive recreational and quality of life
       benefits, as well as active recreational and tourism benefits that can accrue
       from the use of waterways.

12.4   The City Centre has significant stretches of rivers – the Don, Sheaf and Porter
       Brook all flow within the City Centre. In the past, Sheffield’s industries utilised
       the fast-flowing water of the rivers Don and Sheaf. However, the rivers lost
       their industrial function over time and became a less important part of the City
       Centre. They were generally ignored and the narrower stretches, particularly
       of the Sheaf and Porter, have been built on or covered over (culverted). Many
       channels, gulleys and weirs were also created to make best use of the
       waterpower. These and the rivers themselves then became largely hidden
       from view for many years and the rivers became polluted as they began to
       develop a different use as a means of discharging waste from factories. As a
       result these natural assets of Sheffield have become neglected. The River
       Don is severed from the City Centre, while the Porter and Sheaf flow into the
       Don through a network of tunnels or culverts, only occasionally surfacing in
       deep channels framed by the backs of industrial buildings.

12.5   So there is also a need to improve the quality of rivers and riversides and take
       advantage of the opportunities presented by riverside areas in the City Centre.
       In the last 20 years or so, there have been efforts to open them up the rivers
       and to improve their quality and flora and fauna have been returning. The
       Riverside developments have already taken some advantage of their location
       on the Don.

       Policy SCC11 Open Space and Riversides in the City Centre
       A network of informal, public open spaces in the City Centre will be
       provided and enhanced to cater for residents, workers, shoppers,
       tourists, students and other visitors.

       In particular, new spaces will be provided in the following locations:
                                           129
          (a) Nursery Street
          (b) Market Square/ Sheffield Castle
          (c) St. Vincent’s Park
          (d) Porter Brook
          (e) West Bar
          (f) Sheaf Valley Park

       Improvements will be made to the environment and accessibility of all
       rivers and riversides, opening up culverted rivers and providing
       walkways where appropriate.

       Policy Background (Soundness Test 4)
       National Policy

12.6   There are several elements of national planning policy that encourage the
       provision of open in general. The submitted policy promotes open space in
       the part of the City that is the most intensively used, namely the City Centre.
       For example, PPS1, in paragraph 20, says that:

          “development plan policies should take account of environmental issues
          including the provision of good quality open space.”

12.7   PPS6, paragraph 1.5, seeks to:

          “improve the quality of the public realm and open spaces”

12.8   In paragraph 4.4 of PPS6, the provision of open space is seen as a measure
       of health and vitality for centres.

12.9   PPG17 classifies rivers as open spaces, so the submitted policy conforms to
       this guidance in both aspects. Paragraph 31 of PPG17 also specifically
       recognises the visual value of water resources:

          “The visual amenity, heritage and nature conservation value of water
          resources should also be protected.”

12.10 PPG17 also recognises the particular value of open space provision in
      centres, which is particularly relevant to the submitted policy. In paragraph 20,
      when considering where to locate new open space, encourages local
      authorities to:

          “locate more intensive recreational uses in sites where they can contribute
          to town centre vitality and viability”

          and

          “consider the recreational needs of visitors and tourists”



                                          130
       Regional Policy

12.11 There is no specific commitment in the draft Regional Spatial Strategy to
      providing additional City Centre open space, although there is an
      acknowledgement in paragraph 4.62 that:

           “It is important that valuable habitats and open spaces are retained within
           settlements and that a vibrant mix of land uses is maintained.”

12.12 The Regional Economic Strategy (paragraph 1.22) recognises that public
      health issues are likely to have an increasing impact on the economy, and the
      provision of open spaces is identified as something that has to be factored into
      urban design.

       Sub-Regional Policy

       The City Region Development Programme on page 40 recognises the value of
       open space to city centres:

           “Key aspects of quality of place at a neighbourhood level include … access
           to good quality open space”

       Other Sheffield Policies

12.13 The 2000 City Centre Masterplan highlighted the importance of the waterways
      and the unique landscape asset of the River Don. Reconnection with the
      rivers has commenced with the development of riverside sites, but work on the
      roll-forward of the City Centre masterplan has recognised that the potential of
      the riverside and waterways has yet to be fully realised. It is essential that this
      reconnection with the rivers continues, whilst ensuring that development does
      not give rise to increased flood risk.

12.14 Work on the roll-forward of the City Centre masterplan has suggested that the
      four underlying strategic objectives remain as valid today as they did in 2000,
      one of which is to celebrate the public realm, bringing high quality public
      spaces to all parts of the City Centre and celebrating the city’s green heritage.

12.15 Work on the roll-forward of the City Centre masterplan has also identified a
      key issue as the creation of a more sustainable City Centre that is greener,
      with well-managed public spaces and green space provision. Consultation on
      this with the Sheffield 100 Forum showed unanimous support for improving
      open spaces (page 10).68 There was also strong support for a new City park
      and civic spaces.

       Relationship to City Strategy (Soundness Test 5)

12.16 The policy is in line with the 2007 City Strategy, that places a great emphasis
      on the importance of Sheffield’s open spaces and seeks to capitalise on this

68
  Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Review and Roll-Forward – Sheffield 100 Workshop. EDAW
(2006)

                                             131
      asset. One of the five big ambitions is for Sheffield to be an attractive and
      sustainable low-carbon city. Part of the method of achieving this is to

          “Champion strategies for sustainable energy, waste, green and open
          spaces, and transport that contribute to a reduced ecological and carbon
          footprint for the city.”

      Consistency with Other Planning Documents (Soundness Test
      6)

      Core Strategy Objectives

12.17 There are a number of Core Strategy objectives that the policy will help to
      deliver. The policy is considered to have environmental, health, recreational,
      ecological and other benefits, many of which are reflected in the sustainability
      appraisal assessment below. The relevant objectives are:

         S1.3 Environments created, improved and conserved to attract business
          investment, including high-technology manufacturing and knowledge-
          based services

         S6.1 A healthier environment, which includes space for physical activity
          and informal recreation and does not subject people to unacceptable levels
          of pollution, noise or disturbance

         S6.3 Opportunities safeguarded for peaceful enjoyment of urban
          neighbourhoods and the countryside.

         S10.2 Walking and cycling encouraged by design of places and routes
          and by the location of facilities

         S13.1 Natural and landscape features, including valleys, woodlands,
          trees, watercourses and wetlands, safeguarded and enhanced

         S13.2 Biodiversity and wildlife habitats protected and enhanced
          throughout urban and rural areas

         S13.3 Areas and features of particular ecological or geological value
          protected and enhanced

         S13.4 Open space protected and improved and, where necessary,
          created

         S14.1 Enhanced character and distinctiveness of neighbourhoods,
          respecting existing local character and built and natural features to provide
          the context for new development.

      Adjoining Local Authorities’ Plans

12.18 This policy is locally focussed, so it is unlikely that any neighbouring
      authorities will have policies that will impact upon it. Rotherham’s Core

                                         132
       Strategy seeks to promote open space provision in their town centre, so the
       general approach is consistent. The other neighbouring local authorities have
       yet to produce development plan documents that can be considered alongside
       this policy for compatibility.

       Options Considered (Soundness Test 7)
12.19 This submitted policy has been derived from two originally separate Preferred
      Option, one dealing with City Centre open space provision (Preferred Option
      PCC9), the other with rivers and riversides (PCC10). Both were seeking to
      deliver improvements to the open character of the City Centre and improve the
      quality and amount of areas that could be enjoyed for informal recreational
      purposes. For this reason, the City Council decided that they could be
      combined into one policy that seeks to improve the quality of the built and
      natural environment of the City Centre.

12.20 Only one element of the policy was considered at the Emerging Options stage,
      as there was no issue put forward at that stage that dealt specifically with City
      Centre open space. The latter was introduced as a Preferred Option.

12.21 A further change was made to the open space element of the policy after the
      Preferred Options stage. This was introduced as an Additional Option, and
      was the introduction of specific locations for new open space provision.

12.22 The two options considered at Emerging Options stage were either to make
      specific efforts to open up riversides in the City Centre, or to have no specific
      policy, that would require improvements to be delivered by means other than
      planning policies.

       Option CC6a Riversides better utilised with rivers unculverted and
       walkways provided where appropriate. Residential will be the preferred
       use by riversides.

12.23 The strengths of this option are:

       (a) Waterside areas are a key element in providing an attractive and vibrant
           City Centre that encourages development.

       (b) Wildlife benefits are likely to accrue from better treatment of riverside
           areas.

       (c) The visual impact of buildings can be greatly enhanced if they are located
           in a riverside setting, making the areas more attractive to potential
           investors and occupants.

       (d) Housing developments that take place by riversides are likely to prove
           popular with potential residents.

       (e) The opening up of waterside areas can provide recreational benefits where
           facilities such as marinas and landing areas are provided.


                                           133
12.24 The weakness of this option is:

       (a) Provision of some of these beneficial measures, such as access points and
           walkways, can be costly, which could threaten the viability of some
           schemes and limit regeneration options.

       (b) Promoting the provision of housing next to riversides raises the issue of
           flood risk to housing

       Option CC6b No special efforts made to open up riversides.

12.25 Opening up riversides to a significant degree can be costly.

12.26 The main strength of this option is:

       (a) Fewer financial burdens will be placed on developers of riverside sites –
           this could help the overall economic attractiveness of the City Centre to
           potential property developers.

       Weaknesses of the Option

12.27 The main weaknesses of this option are:

       (a) It is likely that a lot of the potential long-term economic benefits that accrue
           from an improved environment will be lost if this option was followed.

       (b) The potential environmental, quality-of-life and recreational benefits will be
           harder to achieve.

12.28 Five specific locations were proposed in the Additional Options consultation:

             Paradise Square
             Nursery Street Riverside Park
             Market Square
             St. Vincent’s Park
             Porter Brook

       Reasons for the Submitted Policy (Soundness Test 7)

       Planning Reasons

12.29 The alternative Emerging Option, to make no special provision to develop
      riversides, was rejected on the grounds that many of the potential long-term
      economic benefits that would accrue from an improved environment will be
      lost if this option was followed. Also, the potential environmental, quality-of-life
      and recreational benefits will be harder to achieve.

12.30 Although not considered as an Emerging Option, the only real alternative to
      the Preferred Option on open space would be to make no additional provision
      for open space above that already required to cater for new City Centre
      residents. This option was rejected, as the anticipated increases in workers,

                                           134
       shoppers and visitors would put unreasonable pressure on the existing open
       spaces in the City Centre.

12.31 Due to pressures of development throughout the City Centre over the years,
      most of the riversides have been either built over or development has taken
      place right up to the river edges, so that they are inaccessible to the public.
      This policy seeks to improve accessibility and remove development from
      riversides.

12.32 Many people find that water forms an attractive part of the urban environment
      and if rivers are incorporated into new development this will make new and
      existing buildings more attractive to residents, workers and visitors. This all
      helps to achieve a vibrant City Centre that is a major draw. This is particularly
      the case if these areas are easily accessible. More green space in the City
      Centre creates a change of pace from other City Centre activities such as
      shopping and work.

12.33 The submitted policy will deliver benefits to wildlife and the natural
      environment, that will improve the quality of life of all Sheffielders and help the
      City achieve its sustainability and biodiversity aims.

12.34 The provision of open space, both greenspace and hard areas, of good quality
      and design, can greatly enhance the attractiveness of the City Centre and
      improve its viability and vitality.

12.35 Experience elsewhere has also shown that accessible waterside areas are a
      key element in providing an attractive and vibrant City Centre that encourages
      development. Natural waterways form an attractive part of the urban
      environment and if rivers are incorporated into new development this will make
      new and existing buildings more appealing to residents, workers and visitors.
      This all helps to achieve a vibrant and attractive City Centre that is a major
      draw. There are economic benefits of utilising the riverside settings of
      development sites that should ensure they can be opened up, although this
      does rely on redevelopment.

12.36 Open areas of the City Centre are used extensively by non-residents as well
      as City Centre residents. Because of this it is important that sufficient informal
      civic open space of suitable quality is provided to cater for these groups of
      people.

12.37 The need to provide more and better open space in the City Centre is
      becoming more pressing and this is expected to continue as the City Centre
      becomes home to more residents, workers and visitors. Residential
      developers already contribute to open space provision, but there will be a
      need for other developments that attract employees, shoppers and other
      visitors to contribute to providing for the increasing demand that their
      developments create.

12.38 There can be significant ecological and wildlife value from creating City Centre
      open space. Green spaces with street trees could include bird and bat boxes
      and other greening to enhance the biodiversity of the City Centre. Wildlife

                                          135
      benefits are likely to accrue from better treatment of riverside areas, improving
      the quality of life of many Sheffielders and helping the city achieve its
      sustainability and biodiversity aims. They will also form important links in the
      Green Network for the city.

12.39 Development can also close up access points to rivers, if there are issues of
      security. This must be addressed as part of the planning application process.

12.40 There will be a need to promote and improve stewardship of these waterside
      areas in order to ensure that their quality is maintained and the benefits
      delivered.

12.41 This policy could possibly result in a decrease in flood risk with creation of
      green open space in flood risk areas. Green space allows water to percolate
      into the ground, and therefore reduces run off. This is particularly important in
      the City Centre, where there is a lot of impervious surfacing that can contribute
      to flood risk by preventing run off from percolating. In addition, opening
      culverted rivers can also help to reduce flood risk by making more space for
      water to flow when levels are high.

      Sustainability Appraisal

12.42 The submitted policy performs better than any of the rejected options overall.
      Improved open space facilities will boost the City Centre economy by making it
      more attractive, which will encourage more visitors, employees and
      customers. Better open space facilities encourage more people to use them,
      which could have related health benefits, and more open spaces create more
      separation between people and vehicles, improving safety. The policy
      specifically encourages the creation and enhancement of open spaces that
      will provide informal recreational space for all who use the City Centre. The
      built environment is improved by the provision of quality open spaces in
      themselves and as settings for buildings. Many existing open spaces have
      been present for many years and contributions to enhance them will add to the
      protection of the City’s historic assets. The policy would improve cultural,
      leisure and recreation facilities that would be available to all and health
      benefits through the encouragement of sustainable transport (walking and
      cycling) and reduction in air pollution. Alternative options to make no
      significant commitment to improving riversides and open spaces are not
      considered particularly sustainable, though they might have some short-term
      economic advantages.

      Equality Appraisal

12.43 Open spaces and riverside walkways can be particularly important to people
      with physical disabilities, who may need safe and suitable areas for resting.
      Children and their carers often require open space areas for play and rest
      whilst shopping or using the City Centre’s leisure facilities.




                                         136
      Consultation Responses

12.44 There was unanimous support for the waterways element of the policy at the
      Emerging Options stage, including from Yorkshire Forward, the Green Party
      and the Liberal Democrat Group, although with one warning on the need to
      consider flood risk. This support was repeated in the Preferred Options
      consultation, with support from English Heritage, English Nature, the Sheffield
      First Health and Wellbeing Partnership, the Environment Agency and Sheffield
      Wildlife Trust.

12.45 Support for the open space Preferred Option was received from the University
      of Sheffield, Sheffield First Health and Wellbeing Partnership and Sheffield
      Wildlife Trust.

12.46 There was support for the policy at Additional Options stage, that proposed
      five specific locations for open space provision, from Sport England. The
      Environment Agency noted the need to assess flood risk on each of the sites
      specified.

      Conclusions on Reasons for Selecting the Policy

12.47 The environmental quality of the City Centre is a crucial element in ensuring
      that it is attractive to workers, residents, visitors and shoppers. For this
      reason, it is necessary to have a policy that promotes environmental
      improvements of the City Centre, by creating and enhancing open space and
      making the best use of the natural assets of watercourses in the City Centre.

      Implementation and Monitoring (Soundness Test 8)
12.48 The policy will be implemented by:

         Using public funding and match funding where available, City Council-
          owned land and CPO powers, so the burden is not placed exclusively on
          developers.

         Seeking the beneficial development of rivers and riversides in partnership
          with developers when dealing with planning applications through the
          development control process and requiring contributions from developers
          (where appropriate) for new and improved open spaces as part of
          development proposals requiring planning permission. The issue of
          stewardship mentioned in 12.40 above is key to this.

         Implementing through Area Action Plans taking particular account of
          stretches of river that may not be likely to benefit from redevelopment.

         Allocating sites in the City Sites documents and on the Proposals Map.

11.38 The Core Strategy does not identify any specific targets or indicators for
      policy SCC11. However, completion of the Sheaf Valley Park by 2018 is the
      key target for policy SOS1 (see Open Space and Sports Facilities Background
      Report). Policy SCC1 is also relevant to the achievement of the target under

                                         137
      policy SE2 (see Environment Background Report). Progress against the
      targets for these policies will be reported in the SDF Annual Monitoring Report.

      Flexibility and Risk Assessment (Soundness Test 9)
12.49 The economic advantages will be balanced by a negative impact if a financial
      burden for open space provision and riverside improvements falls on
      developers and becomes an additional cost of development. So, although
      quality open space and riverside access is essential for the effective operation
      of the City Centre in economic and social terms, the financial burden must not
      be so high as to have an adverse impact on regeneration and levels of new
      development. The higher land values that are generally to be achieved in the
      City Centre should allow for this to be borne as long as expectations are
      reasonable and the financial situation will be considered by the City Council
      when assessing schemes to ensure viability, as well as other planning
      considerations, when making decisions on individual schemes.

      Conclusion
12.50 There are obvious environmental benefits that will result from the provision of
      improved and new open space areas in the City Centre, as well as better use
      of, and access to, the City Centre’s riversides. There are also additional
      economic benefits to City Centre businesses of this policy. This has been
      demonstrated by near universal support for the submitted policy as it has
      emerged through the consultation process.

12.51 The issue of delivery of the policy is important, as there are financial
      considerations and partnership working issues that need to be addressed.
      However, The City Council and development partners are committed to the
      delivery of the policy, which will encourage the business community to also
      assist in the delivery this option. This means that the aims of the policy are
      based on sound principles.




                                         138
13 OTHER RELEVANT STRATEGY DOCUMENTS
13.1   Other documents that impact specifically on the City Centre are listed below.

       The City Centre Masterplan
13.2   Central Government policies over recent years have emphasised the
       important role of city centres and planning policy guidance issued in PPS669
       has reiterated this approach. In Sheffield, the Government appointed an
       Urban Regeneration Company, Sheffield One, in August 2000, to work to
       achieve the maximum possible growth in the City Centre in order to ensure its
       full potential was reached. Sheffield One has since been amalgamated into a
       new City Development Company, Creative Sheffield, but was a partnership of
       Sheffield City Council, Yorkshire Forward and English Partnerships. The
       company's overall mission statement was:

           "To develop Sheffield city centre as a vibrant and attractive European city
           and a driver of regional economic growth and competitiveness".

13.3   Koetter Kim produced the first Sheffield City Centre Masterplan for Sheffield
       One in February 200170 after an extensive consultation exercise and the Plan
       was endorsed by key partners in Sheffield, and by the regional and national
       regeneration agencies. It sought to guide the revitalisation of the City Centre
       over the following 10 - 15 years. The Masterplan highlighted a number of key
       challenges and opportunities for the City Centre focused on the economy
       (including social exclusion), the property market, the retail, leisure and cultural
       offer and the transport system. The partners leading Sheffield's urban
       renaissance are working together to tackle these issues and transform the City
       Centre into an engine for economic growth for the whole of South Yorkshire.
       A primary objective is to create new jobs and ensure that local communities
       have access to them. The City Centre Masterplan focuses on the core of the
       City Centre and the delivery of 7 landmark projects as strategic priorities:

          The Heart of the City,
          the New Retail Quarter (NRQ),
          Sheffield City Hall / Barker's Pool,
          the E-Campus,
          Castlegate,
          Sheffield Midland Railway Station
          an Integrated Transport Strategy.

13.4   The plan is under review in 2007 and will take these areas on board in greater
       detail. Creative Sheffield is working with consultants EDAW to produce a roll-


69
   ODPM, Planning Policy Statement 6:Planning for Town Centres, March 2005.
www.odpm.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1143820
70
   Sheffield City Centre Masterplan Sheffield First Partnership (2001) - see
http://www.creativesheffield.co.uk/DevelopInSheffield/CityCentreMasterplan/?WBCMODE=Presentatio
nUnpublished

                                             139
       forward of the City Centre Masterplan, to look to the next phase of
       regeneration of Sheffield City Centre.

13.5   Background work commissioned by Sheffield One71 suggested that many
       more jobs need to be created in the City Centre to turn the local economy
       around and bring in substantial private sector investment.

       City Centre Living Strategy Supplementary Planning Guidance
13.6   Produced by Sheffield City Council and approved by Cabinet in April 2004, the
       strategy is that “Housing development …takes place in a sustainable way
       which builds stable, well-resourced communities which enjoy a high quality of
       life. This Strategy … will give shape and direction to this movement and will
       ensure that it is co-ordinated with wider steps to regenerate the City Centre.

       Night-Time Uses – Draft Interim Planning Guidance
13.7   In response to the Licensing Act 2003, Interim Planning Policy Guidance
       relating to the night-time economy was issued by the City Council in February
       2005, after approval of the Statement of Licensing Policy required under the
       2003 Act, on 1 December 2004. This policy is aimed at delivering a Licensing
       Service that at all times promotes the licensing objectives in a manner that is
       consistent with other stated objectives of the Council, including planning
       policies and procedures, within the constraints of the legislation.

13.8   To respond to this, it was considered appropriate that clarification of the
       planning position relating to entertainment and night time uses for the City was
       produced, with a view to later incorporation into the SDF in a way that
       conforms with the emerging development plan policies.

       Planning for Town Centres: Guidance on Design and
       Implementation Tools (2005)
13.9   This guidance72 deals specifically with design issues for centres and
       implementation tools for town centre policies. It supports PPS6.

       The Urban Design Compendium (September 2004)
13.10 Seeks to ensure that Sheffield’s new direction and development energy is
      translated into improving the design and built form of the City as a whole,
      focusing on the City Centre in particular. This has been approved by the City
      Council and is a material consideration in determining planning applications.
      Consequently, it carries significant weight when considering options for the
      Core Strategy.




71
   An Updated Baseline for Sheffield - A Final Report for Sheffield One, ECOTEC Research and
Consulting Limited, July 2002
72
   Planning for Town Centres: Guidance on Design and Implementation Tools. ODPM (2005)

                                               140
13.11 Alongside the City Centre Masterplan, a series of more detailed masterplans
      and action plans have been produced that set out how the aims and objectives
      are to be achieved at a local level.

       Cathedral Quarter Action Plan (2005)
13.12 The Action Plan73 proposes that vacant sites and buildings are encouraged to
      develop with mixed uses, including non-student housing, smaller offices, food
      and drink (but with controlled opening hours) and specialist retail, to create a
      more lively and sustainable combination of activity, enriching the area without
      undermining the still very significant office employment it supports. Public
      realm improvements are also proposed to improve pedestrian connections to
      the Riverside and St Vincent’s areas, as well as strategic enhancements such
      as Paradise Square and Campo Lane.

       CIQ Action Plan (1999)
13.13 The Cultural Industries Quarter (CIQ) initiative has established a key cluster in
      the area focussed around Paternoster Row and in the Conservation Area. It is
      currently being reviewed by consultants on behalf of Creative Sheffield and
      Sheffield City Council, with a view to updating the City Centre Master Plan
      (2000) and the CIQ Action Plan (1999).

       Sheaf Valley Masterplan (2006)
13.14 The Sheaf Valley Masterplan74 has been the subject of extensive public
      consultation and has been adopted by the Sheffield One (now Creative
      Sheffield) board. It has yet to be adopted by the City Council, as it is expected
      that the principles it sets out will be taken up and incorporated into the new
      City Centre Masterplan.

       The Moor Design and Development Framework (2004)
13.15 A ‘Design and Development Framework’, prepared by the Deutschebank, was
      endorsed in December 2004 to guide new development, including a new
      indoor market (relocation from Castlegate) and outline the framework for an
      improved public realm.

       The Devonshire Quarter Action Plan (2000)75
13.16 The Action Plan has now substantially achieved its goals, namely successful
      housing projects on derelict sites, Division Street and Charter Row now rebuilt
      and made pedestrian-friendly, Devonshire Green Skate Park relieving the
      pressure on other renewed public spaces, and CCTV extended thus improving


73
   Sheffield City Council, Cathedral Quarter Action Plan 2004-2014, February 2005
www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/planning-and-city-development/planning-documents/background-
reports/cathedral-quarter-action-plan
74
   Sheaf Valley Masterplan. OCA Consultants (March 2006)
75
   Devonshire Quarter Action Plan. Sheffield City Council (2000)

                                              141
       public safety. In the pipeline is new pedestrian signage and the
       redevelopment of Devonshire Green / Gell Street Park.

       St Vincent’s Action Plan (2004)
13.17 The Action Plan was adopted by Sheffield City Council in 2004 following
      detailed consultation to assist the transition and regeneration of the area over
      the next 10 years.

13.18 The Action Plan has allowed for the introduction of housing to the south of
      Scotland Street and along and around Alma Street and Green Lane. Business
      Areas that retain and enhance employment space have been proposed for
      Tenter Street, Hollis Croft and North of Scotland Street. Housing around St
      Georges Close and University uses at the former Health and Safety Executive
      laboratory in the South have not changed.

13.19 The vision is for the creation of a vibrant, mixed, new population that takes full
      advantage of its position at the edge of the City Centre and transport links,
      with improvements to the pedestrian ways back into St Georges and the
      Cathedral Quarter. A business corridor is to be created along Tenter Street
      and Broad Lane providing office space for the expansion of the Legal &
      Professional Quarter. Business will also be accommodated North of Scotland
      Street with an emphasis on encouraging office uses along the Inner Relief
      Road frontage. This is to be encouraged through the marketing of the
      Sheffield City Council Hoyle Street Site, a key gateway, not only for St
      Vincent’s, but the City Centre on approaching from the Upper Don Valley.

13.20 The major challenges include:

          Ensuring a mix of tenure of housing (neither private, rented, student nor
           social housing to become dominant)
          Ensuring the retention of business space
          Protection of existing businesses in the area in the short to medium term
          Improving community safety
          Creating the right environment through the public realm for residents and
           businesses
          Providing or assisting with the movement of industry to more suitable areas
           of the City

13.21 The St Vincent’s Action Plan has led to the formation of a Steering Group to
      investigate the reuse of the St Vincent’s Church site and buildings.

       Castlegate Masterplan (2005)
13.22 The original ‘Castlegate Quarter Study’, also prepared by EDAW, was
      completed in November 2002. The key assumption for the original study in
      2002, was that the Castle Markets would remain in the area. It then outlined a
      vision, based largely on continuation of the retail use of the area anchored by
      either a refurbished or a brand new market.



                                          142
13.23 Since then there have been 3 significant changes - the construction of the
      northern section of the Inner Relief Road has started, it is now likely that the
      market will now relocate to a new site on The Moor and Carillion have made a
      substantial start on the redevelopment of the former Sheaf Markets site (see
      paragraph 1.62). So, it was apparent that the area needed a fresh look.
      Consultants EDAW were reappointed and commenced their study in
      September 2004. The new masterplan was produced in October 2005.76

13.24 The key assumption of the new Masterplan is that the indoor market will go
      from the area altogether. This gives the Masterplan a specific focus and
      allows a new “vision” to be developed.

13.25 This vision is also driven firstly by the likely large reduction in traffic on the
      edges of the Quarter, once the IRR is completed and the opportunities that
      this presents; secondly by recent and significant changes in the immediately
      adjacent areas, such as Exchange Riverside as well as proposed
      development such as at West Bar and Blonk Street; by the shift in the retail
      core towards the south-west as a result of the NRQ; and finally by the
      existence of significant archaeological remains under the market.

13.26 The markets’ gradual decline – in terms of turnover and the poor state of the
      buildings, has coincided with the general decline of this area over the past 10
      years or so. The area has become increasingly reliant on value retailing,
      putting a question mark on the long-term future of the area in terms of retail
      use. The Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy proposes to
      contract the City Centre shopping area, so large-scale retail use would not fit
      well with the overall City Centre regeneration strategy, in which case such a
      use would be confined to the Primark / Co-op block, with the remaining area
      performing very much a secondary retail function. The time is therefore ripe
      for re-assessing Castlegate's future economic role, within a regenerated City
      Centre.

13.27 The area also has many vacant old buildings, such as the Old Courthouse
      (which needs bringing back into use); and the former BHS building (possible
      redevelopment).

13.28 The danger is that without a clear vision and a strategy, the area’s decline
      could continue. The Masterplan outlines a new vision and identifies key areas
      of intervention both to anticipate and steer the process of change.

13.29 At the strategic level the economic role of Castlegate will change from an
      overwhelming dominance of retailing to more of a mix of uses.

13.30 On a local level, the Castle Market block is identified as the key catalyst for
      transforming this area. Without a successful vision and an implementation
      strategy for this site, the rest of the area is unlikely to succeed in moving from
      the current, somewhat run down, shrouded in uncertainty image to a new
      purpose and identity, anchored by a clear economic role. This site has the
      potential for the most dramatic change. The archaeological remains can be
76
  Sheffield City Council / EDAW, Castlegate: ‘A New Vision’ and ‘Policy and Development
Framework’, October 2005

                                               143
          uncovered; the retaining wall on Castlegate (below the meat and fish market
          service area) removed or partially removed and access down to the River Don
          opened up or improved. A pedestrianised Castlegate, removing part of the
          culvert to expose River Sheaf (between Exchange Street and Castlegate)
          combined with much-enhanced public realm, will allow a new identity to be
          created for the area. This may take the form of restored castle ruins in a
          landscaped setting, along with a visitor and interpretation centre, interspersed
          with high value, tall residential and office buildings.

13.31 Wilkinsons store currently trades well and is likely to continue successful
      trading after the market has gone. This will bring people to the area and is a
      strength.

13.32 The City Council’s Cabinet broadly endorsed the new ‘Masterplan’ in March
      2006, as the basis for guiding future regeneration of the Castlegate Quarter,
      as a contribution to the City Centre Masterplan Review and to the emerging
      Sheffield Development Framework.

          Kelham Island and Neepsend Action Plan (in preparation)
13.33 A draft Kelham Island and Neepsend Action Plan has been produced and is
      due for consideration by the City Council’s Cabinet in November 2007.

13.34 The production of an Action Plan is proposed to ensure a comprehensive
      coverage of planning and regeneration policy (this area is not covered by such
      a policy, in contrast to the adjacent regeneration areas); to provide a coherent
      development and design framework for the area; to identify key interventions
      as part of an implementation strategy.

          West Bar Interim Planning Guidance (IPG) (July 2006)
13.35 Interim Planning Guidance (IPG) has been produced for the West Bar
      Quarter77.. It was adopted as a material consideration for determining planning
      applications.

13.36 The Key Principles include the aim of linking the area with the core of the City
      Centre and to deliver a mix of uses. This mix must include at least 50% of
      office uses but will also allow for a range of other uses such as small shops,
      food and drink outlets, housing, leisure and open space.

          Wicker Riverside Action Plan (Expected 2007)
13.37 Proposals to regenerate the Wicker / Nursery Street Area were on show at an
      open day on Friday 30 September 2005 and a consultation event was also
      held in May 2007. The Action Plan will focus on land uses, open spaces, the
      future role of the area and its uses and the proximity of the river Don.




77
     West Bar Interim Planning Guidance. Sheffield City Council (July 2006)

                                                  144
APPENDIX 1 – DELIVERY SCHEDULES

    Policy SCC1 - City Centre Quarters -

              Actions required                           Agencies               Timing                  Probability



To deliver:
   The provision of Action Plans for each of      Sheffield City Council   Likely to be     Medium / High – significant
    the quarters                                                             on a rolling     commitment to City Centre
                                                                             basis            Action Plans is already in place
                                                                             reflecting       and likely to continue.
                                                                             relative
                                                                             priorities for
                                                                             the different
                                                                             quarters
   Decisions on planning applications will        Sheffield City Council   Ongoing          High – statutory responsibility
    also be made with regard to the
    character of the particular City Centre
    quarter in which the site is located.
To support:
   The City Centre Masterplan.                    Creative Sheffield /     Being            High – there is a strong
                                                    Sheffield City Council   reviewed.        commitment to delivering
                                                                             Expected         regeneration through master
                                                                             2007             planning and Action Plans.




                                                                  145
    Policy SCC2 - Offices in the City Centre

              Actions required                            Agencies           Timing                Probability



To deliver:
   Working closely with landowners and           Sheffield City Council   Up to 15     High – fundamental aim of the
    developers in the private sector as well      Creative Sheffield       years        Core Strategy.
    as with regeneration and funding              Yorkshire Forward
    agencies, to ensure that sites are
    allocated and retained for office
    development in the areas specified.
   Allocation of sites in the City Sites         Sheffield City Council   Ongoing      High – fundamental aim of the
    document                                                                             Core Strategy.
   Determining planning applications             Sheffield City Council   Ongoing      High – statutory responsibility
To support:
   Action Plans                                  Sheffield City Council   Ongoing      Medium / High – delivery
                                                                                         mechanisms for the City
                                                                                         Centre Quarters policy
   City Centre Masterplan                        Sheffield City Council   Roll-        Medium / High – required to
                                                  Creative Sheffield       forward to   focus priorities for City Centre
                                                                            be           regeneration
                                                                            produced
                                                                            in 2007
   Economic Masterplan                           Sheffield City Council   To be        High – required to focus
                                                  Creative Sheffield       produced     priorities for the City’s
                                                                            in 2007      regeneration




                                                                   146
    Policy SCC3 - Shopping in the City Centre

              Actions required                            Agencies           Timing            Probability



To deliver:
   Developing the NRQ                            Sheffield City Council   2013      High – Enabling work started
                                                  Creative Sheffield                 and outline planning
                                                                                      permission secured
   Further investment and consolidation          Sheffield City Council   Ongoing   Medium – commitment to
    of the other key retail areas,                                                    development in many areas,
    particularly the Core Retail Area and                                             e.g. The Moor
    Shopping Streets, such as The Moor.
   Determining planning applications in          Sheffield City Council   Ongoing   High – once adopted, planning
    line with the hierarchy of locations set                                          permissions should be granted
    out in the policy.                                                                in accordance with the SDF
                                                                                      policy.
To support:
Sheffield City Centre Masterplan                  Creative Sheffield       To 2010   High



Policy SCC4 - Cultural Facilities in the City Centre

              Actions required                            Agencies           Timing            Probability



To deliver:
   Supporting the Cultural Hub                   Sheffield City Council   Ongoing   Medium – commitment to


                                                                   147
                                                Theatres Trust                          cultural development in the
                                                Central Government (Arts                Culture Strategy and crucible
                                                 Council)                                redevelopment taking place
   Determining planning applications           Sheffield City Council        Ongoing   High – statutory responsibility
To support:
   Action Plans and Masterplans                Sheffield City Council        Varies    High



Policy SCC5 - The Universities

              Actions required                          Agencies                Timing             Probability



To deliver:
   Working with the two universities to        Sheffield City Council        Ongoing   Medium – partnership working
    deliver this approach.                      University of Sheffield                 established through the
                                                Sheffield Hallam University             Sheffield First Local Strategic
                                                                                         Partnership.
   Ensuring that City Policies, City Site      Sheffield City Council        Ongoing   High – statutory responsibility.
    allocations and designations on the
    Proposals Map encourage the
    continuing important role of the
    Universities
   Determining planning applications           Sheffield City Council        Ongoing   High – statutory responsibility




                                                                 148
Policy SCC6 - Housing in the City Centre

              Actions required                            Agencies                Timing                   Probability



To deliver:
  Allocation of sites in the City Sites          Sheffield City Council     Ongoing            High – fundamental aim of the
   document                                                                                      Core Strategy.
Determining planning applications                 Sheffield City Council     Ongoing            High – statutory responsibility
To support:
Masterplans and Action Plans.                     Sheffield City Council
                                                  Creative Sheffield



Policy SCC7 - Manufacturing and the City Centre – Transition Areas

              Actions required                           Agencies              Timing                Probability



To deliver:
   Determining planning applications – new       Sheffield City Council   Ongoing        High – statutory responsibility
    industrial development in the Transition
    Areas will not be permitted
    Committing to the transformation of the      Sheffield City Council   Ongoing        High – other policies deal with
    affected areas and an effective strategy      Creative Sheffield                      relocation opportunities
    to provide land and sites for relocating
    companies.


                                                                  149
     Ensuring assistance from the City               Sheffield City Council                High – issues likely to be dealt
     Council’s regeneration partners and              Creative Sheffield                    with also through the City
     using funding options wherever possible          Yorkshire Forward                     Centre and Economic
                                                                                             Masterplans
To support:
Masterplans – for the Upper Don, Lower                Sheffield City Council   Ongoing      High – strong commitment to
Don, Central Riverside, for example and                                                      delivering regeneration through
Action Plans.                                                                                master planning and Action
                                                                                             Plans.



    Policy SCC8 - Tall Buildings in the City Centre

              Actions required                               Agencies             Timing             Probability



To deliver:
    Determining planning applications in            Sheffield City Council     Ongoing   High – statutory responsibility.
     accordance with the criteria set out and
     applying the principles of the Urban
     Design Compendium
                                                     Sheffield City Council




                                                                      150
Policy SCC9 - Transport in the City Centre

              Actions required                          Agencies                  Timing                    Probability



To deliver:
   Delivery through the Local Transport        Sheffield City Council      2011               High – statutory responsibility
    Plan 2 (LTP2)                               South Yorkshire Passenger
                                                 Transport Authority
   Determining planning applications           Sheffield City Council      Ongoing            High – statutory responsibility
To support:
Sheffield City Centre Masterplan                Creative Sheffield          To 2010            High



Policy SCC10 - Pedestrian Environment in the City Centre

              Actions required                          Agencies              Timing                   Probability



To deliver:
   Delivering transport improvements with      Sheffield City Council      2011          High – statutory responsibility
    the help of funding and priorities set      South Yorkshire Passenger
    through the Local Transport Plan 2,          Transport Authority
    2006-2011.
   Producing and implementing a                Sheffield City Council      ##            ##
    Pedestrian Strategy
   Determining planning applications           Sheffield City Council      Ongoing       High – statutory responsibility


                                                                 151
To support:
Action Plans and Masterplans                      Sheffield City Council   Varies    High



Policy SCC11 - Open Space and Riversides in the City Centre

              Actions required                            Agencies           Timing            Probability



To deliver:
   Using public funding and match                Sheffield City Council   Ongoing   Medium – funding is limited
    funding where available, City Council-                                            and will be prioritised..
    owned land and CPO powers.
To support:
   Many of these areas may also be the           Sheffield City Council   Varied    Medium / High – several
    subject of Action Plans and                                                       masterplans / Area Action
    masterplans, that will ensure that these                                          Plans are already in place and
    uses are effectively accounted for.                                               new and reviewed plans are
                                                                                      likely.




                                                                   152
APPENDIX 2 – CONNECTIONS WITH NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY AND THE REGIONAL
SPATIAL STRATEGY
National Planning Policy
 Core Strategy Policy                                                                                                           Relevant National Policy              Connection
                                                                                                                                                                      with National
                                                                                                                                                                         Policy78
 SCC1 City Centre Quarters                                                                                                      PPS6, Annexe A                              1
                                                                                                                                PPS6, paragraph 2.31                        2
 SCC2 Offices in the City Centre                                                                                                PPS6, paragraph 2.31                        3

 SCC3 Shopping in the City Centre                                                                                               PPS6, paragraph 1.5                           2
                                                                                                                                PPS6, paragraph 2.41                          2
                                                                                                                                PPG13, paragraph 3                            3
 SCC4 Cultural Facilities in the City Centre                                                                                    Good Practice Guide on                        3
                                                                                                                                Planning for Tourism,
                                                                                                                                paragraph 2.5
 SCC5 The Universities                                                                                                          PPS1, paragraph 16                            1
                                                                                                                                PPS1, paragraph 23                            1
                                                                                                                                PPS1, paragraph 27                            1
 SCC6 Housing in the City Centre                                                                                                PPS3, paragraph 38                            2
                                                                                                                                PPS6, paragraph 2.16                          2
                                                                                                                                PPS6, paragraph 2.16                          2
                                                                                                                                PPS6, paragraph 2.31                          2
 SCC7 Manufacturing and the City Centre – Transition Areas                                                                      General aims of PPS3 and                      3
                                                                                                                                PPS6
 SCC8 Tall Buildings in the City Centre                                                                                         PPS1, paragraph 27                            2
                                                                                                                                PPS6, paragraph 1.5                           2
                                                                                                                                PPS3, paragraph 46                            2

78
  1 = Local policy specifically required by national policy; 2 = Locally distinctive interpretation of national policy; 3 = Generally supplements/ supports national policy; 4 =
Repeats national policy; 5 = Not dealt with in national policy


                                                                                        153
 Core Strategy Policy                                                                                                            Relevant National Policy              Connection
                                                                                                                                                                       with National
                                                                                                                                                                          Policy78
                                                                                                                                 PPS6, paragraph 2.4                         2
                                                                                                                                 PPS6, paragraph 2.20                        2
                                                                                                                                 Guidance on Tall Buildings                  1

 SCC9 Transport in the City Centre                                                                                               PPG13, paragraph 28                              3
                                                                                                                                 PPG13, paragraph 59                              1
                                                                                                                                 PPG13, paragraph 72                              1
 SCC10 Pedestrian Environment in the City Centre                                                                                 PPG13, paragraph 8                               1
                                                                                                                                 PPG13, paragraph 65                              1
                                                                                                                                 PPG13, paragraph 67                              1
 SCC11 Open Space and Riversides in the City Centre                                                                              PPS1, paragraph 20                               3
                                                                                                                                 PPS6, paragraph 1.5                              1
                                                                                                                                 PPS6, paragraph 4.4                              3
                                                                                                                                 PPG17, paragraph 20                              1
                                                                                                                                 PPG17, paragraph 31                              1
 1 = Local policy specifically required by national policy; 2 = Locally distinctive interpretation of national policy; 3 = Generally supplements/ supports national policy; 4 =
Repeats national policy; 5 = Not dealt with in national policy




                                                                                        154
Regional Spatial Strategy
 City Policy Preferred Option                                                                     Relevant RSS Policy or         Connection
                                                                                                  Paragraph                      with RSS79

 SCC1 City Centre Quarters                                                                        SY1 B                               1
 SCC2 Offices in the City Centre                                                                  YH1                                 3
                                                                                                  YH5 (iv)                            3
 SCC3 Shopping in the City Centre                                                                 YH5                                 3
                                                                                                  YH8 A i)                            1
                                                                                                  E2                                  1
 SCC4 Cultural Facilities in the City Centre                                                      E2 A                                3
                                                                                                  E1 B iii                            3
 SCC5   The Universities                                                                          Paragraph 14.5                      1
 SCC6   Housing in the City Centre                                                                YH5                                 2
 SCC7   Manufacturing and the City Centre – Transition Areas                                      Paragraph 14.23                     1
 SCC8   Tall Buildings in the City Centre                                                         YH2 A                               2
 SCC9   Transport in the City Centre                                                              T1                                  1
                                                                                                  T2                                  1
                                                                                                  T3 B                                1
 SCC10 Pedestrian Environment in the City Centre                                                  T1 D                                3
                                                                                                  T2 D                                1
 SCC11 Open Space and Riversides in the City Centre                                               Paragraph 4.62                      3




79
  1 = Required by RSS; 2 = Locally distinctive interpretation of RSS policy; 3 = Generally supplements RSS policy; 4 = Repeats RSS policy;
5 = Not dealt with in RSS policy


                                                                    155

								
To top