REPORT TO THE PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD TO BE HELD ON THE 25 TH JANUARY, 2010

The following applications are submitted for your consideration. It is recommended that decisions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 be recorded as indicated.

INDEX PAGE

RB2008/1372 Page 4 Outline application with all matters reserved except for the means of access for a new community comprising residential (3890 units) commercial development (including office, live/work, retail, financial and professional services, restaurants, snack bars and cafes, drinking establishments, hot food takeaways, entertainment and leisure uses and a hotel) and open space (including parkland and public realm, sport and recreation facilities), together with 2 no. 2 form entry primary schools, health, cultural and community facilities, public transport routes, footpaths, cycleways and bridleways, landscaping, waste facilities and all related infrastructure (including roads, car and cycle parking, gas or biofuel combined heat and power generation plant and equipment, gas facilities, water supply, electricity, district heating, telecommunications, foul and surface water drainage systems and lighting) for Harworth Estates (Waverley Prince) Ltd.

RB2008/1695 Page 152 Outline application with all matters reserved except for the means of access for the development of 60,000m² of B1 office space, 120 bed hotel and ancillary retail and leisure facilities at land off Highfield Spring, Catcliffe for Helical Governetz.

1 REPORT TO THE PLANNING REGULATORY BOARD TO BE HELD ON 25 TH JANUARY, 2010

The following applications are submitted for your consideration. It is recommended that decisions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 be recorded as indicated.

RB2008/1372

Outline application with all matters reserved except for the means of access for a new community comprising residential (3890 units) commercial development (including office, live/work, retail, financial and professional services, restaurants, snack bars and cafes, drinking establishments, hot food takeaways, entertainment and leisure uses and a hotel) and open space (including parkland and public realm, sport and recreation facilities), together with 2 no. 2 form entry primary schools, health, cultural and community facilities, public transport routes, footpaths, cycleways and bridleways, landscaping, waste facilities and all related infrastructure (including roads, car and cycle parking, gas or biofuel combined heat and power generation plant and equipment, gas facilities, water supply, electricity, district heating, telecommunications, foul and surface water drainage systems and lighting) for Harworth Estates (Waverley Prince) Ltd.

RECOMMENDATION

A. That the application be referred to the Secretary of State as a departure under the Town and Country Planning (Development Plans and Consultation) (Departures) Directions 1999 as the application proposal is a departure to the UDP.

B. That consequent upon the Secretary of State deciding not to intervene planning permission be granted subject to:

(i) Completion of an agreement between the applicant and the Council pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the purposes of ensuring:

1. A financial contribution towards the provision of 2no. 2 form entry primary schools of £11,270,000 to be paid in four instalments based on a financial sum of £5,635,000 for each school and the provision of land for the construction of these schools on site. The area being a minimum of 18,256sqm. The financial sum shall be payable to RMBC in the following manner:

2 a) 5% 91 days following Determination for the first primary school but no sooner than 400 houses occupied. b) 45% within 30 days of RMBC approval of the Tender to apply the first school premises but no sooner than 550 dwellings. c) 5% 91 days following a Determination for the second primary school but no sooner than 1550 dwellings. d) 45% within 30 days of RMBC approval of the Tender to supply the second school premises but no sooner than 1750 dwellings.

2. The delivery of 21% affordable housing across the application site. The affordable housing units to be proportioned as follows:

• Phase 1: 5% of 915 units being 45 Affordable Housing units provided that such units will not have to be delivered until after the completion of the 510 th market house.

• Phase 2: 22.5% of 966 units being 217 Affordable Housing units.

• Phase 3: 25% of 984 units being 246 Affordable Housing units.

• Phase 4: 30% of 1025 units being 308 Affordable Housing units.

The Affordable Housing units will be provided in the ratio of 44% Shared Ownership units and 56% Social Rented Accommodation to be made available to qualifying persons .

3. The provision of a 400sqm Community Centre upon completion of 915 dwellings.

4. The provision of a 340sqm library and a financial contribution of £250,000 towards its fit out costs upon completion of 915 dwellings.

5. The provision of a 120sqm office for use by the Management Company upon completion of 915 dwellings.

6. The provision of 3 no. Local Equipped Areas of Play (LEAP’s) on site upon completion of 915, 2865 and 3890 dwellings.

3

7. The provision of 1 no. Neighbourhood Equipped Area of Play (NEAP) on site, half to be provided upon completion of 1880 dwellings and the remainder upon completion of 2865 dwellings.

8. The provision of 7 no. Local Areas of Play (LAP’s) on site upon completion of 915, 1880 and 3890 dwellings.

9. The provision of 1 no. Multi Use Games Areas (MUGA) on site upon completion of 1880 dwellings.

10. A financial contribution of £120,000 towards improvements to 3 no. existing adult play pitches in Handsworth upon completion of 915 dwellings.

11. A financial contribution of £104,000 towards improvements to 2 no. existing adult play pitches in Woodhouse Mill upon completion of 1881 dwellings.

12. A financial contribution of £55,000 towards improvements to 1 no. existing adult play pitch in Treeton upon completion of 1881 dwellings.

13. The provision of 2 no. Youth Shelters on site upon completion of 915 and 2865 dwellings.

14. The provision of a minimum of 30 allotment plots on site with toilet, storage and parking facilities throughout phases 2 and 3 of the development.

15. Physical improvements to the existing pedestrian bridge over the River Rother to DDA standards prior to the completion of the allotments.

16. The provision of a health centre and adjoining car park area in accordance with the business plan of and according to a programme to be agreed with Rotherham PCT. The building will be a minimum of 1,300sqm to meet the specification set out in guidelines issued by the Department of Health. 100sqm of accommodation will also be provided for use as an interim, temporary health centre upon completion of 915 dwellings.

17. A financial contribution of £2,000 per annum for a 20 year period towards the monitoring of Air Quality in the area.

18. A financial contribution of £1,300,000 towards the provision of the Waverley Link Road. Such contribution

4 only to be paid if such a contribution has not already been paid under the terms of planning permission for the development of the Highfield Commercial site and for the avoidance of doubt, such contribution only to be paid once in relation to either the WNC, the Helical Governetz, or the Highfield Commercial schemes. Any contribution shall be paid in monthly instalments equating to no more than 10% of the cost incurred in the proceeding calendar month in constructing the WLR.

19. A financial contribution payable to SYPTE towards the provision of the following:

• Transport Interchange : £200,000 • Interchange Structural Landscaping: £100,000 • Procurement of building not exceeding: £600,000

20. Travel Plan Measures including a financial contribution of £1,614,000 towards the delivery of the following:

• Employment of a Travel Plan Coordinator • Provision of Real Time Information Systems in apartment blocks and strategic locations across the site. • Provision of Car Club facilities (min 2 cars) within the site and free membership for all occupants for the first year of their occupation. • Prior to the completion of 600 dwellings provision of a scheme enabling residents to book use of free bicycles. A minimum of 20 bicycles will be provided in the first instance. • Travel Packs shall be issued to residents on the purchase of homes at the site. • Subsidised Bus Fares - On first occupation each household to receive free an annual SYPTE Developers Travel Mastercard subject to a maximum expenditure of £600,000 on this measure.

21. A financial contribution of £1,500,000 for the improvement of future transport provision. Such sum to be paid at the direction of the Travel Plan Steering Group on the following basis:

5 • The sum of £40,000 to be paid upon occupation of the first dwelling and to be used for the provision of new bus shelters on Poplar Way • A further £500,000 to be paid, if necessary, prior to the completion of each of the 1881 st and 2865 th dwellings respectively. • The balance to be paid, if necessary, prior to the completion of the 3890 th dwelling.

22. To enter into an agreement under S278 of the Highways Act 1980 for the purposes of carrying out the highway works to Junction 33 of the M1 and the A630 Parkway. Works to be completed prior to the occupation of the 2500 th dwelling. Alternatively a financial contribution of up to £760,000 to be paid towards the undertaking of the works, such payment also to be made on the occupation of the 2,500 th dwelling.

23. Reinstatement of Highfield Lane to adoptable standards in accordance with the approximate location shown in the Design and Access Statement.

24. Prior to the occupation of the first building on site Harworth Estates to establish a Management Company on terms acceptable to RMBC.

25. To pay a sum of £232,500 as a contribution to the Junction 34 Half Penny Link highway improvement scheme such payment to be made on the letting of the road construction contract for the whole scheme. Provided that should the whole of the J34 Half Penny Link improvement scheme does not proceed within 10 years of the execution of the s106 Agreement this obligation to make a contribution shall expire.

(ii) The Reasons for Grant and conditions below

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material consideration as set out below:

a. Development Plan RSS

1) YH1 ‘Overall Approach and Key Spatial Strategies’ seeks to transform the economic, environmental and social conditions in the Regeneration Priority Areas which includes the older industrialised parts of South Yorkshire.

6 2) YH2 ‘Climate Change and Resource Use’ sets out a number of means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including increasing development in cities and towns; encouraging better energy, resource and water efficient buildings; minimising resource demands from development; redeveloping previously developed land; effective waste management; and increasing renewable energy, capacity and carbon capture.

3) YH4 ‘Regional Cities and Sub Regional Cities and Towns’ are identified as the prime focus for housing, employment, shopping, leisure, education, health and cultural activities and facilities in the region; they should be attractive places to live and work and accessibility by public transport and other modes of transport is important.

4) YH7 ‘Location of Development’ states that first priority should be for the re-use of previously developed land and buildings.

5) YH9 ‘Green Belts’ states that the Green belts in North, South and West Yorkshire have a valuable role in supporting urban renaissance, transformation and concentration, as well as conserving countryside, and their general extent. It also states that they should not be changed.

6) SY1 ‘South Yorkshire Sub Area Policy’ states that most developments should be focused on Sheffield and the sub regional towns, including Rotherham.

7) ENV1 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ refers to reducing the causes of flooding to existing and future development.

8) ENV3 ‘Water Quality’ promotes a high standard of water quality in the region; prevents development that would cause pollution of water and promotes adequate sewerage infrastructure.

9) ENV5 ‘Energy’ will maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increases in renewable energy capacity through orientation and layout of development; maximising the use of combined heat and power; community heating opportunities supporting the use of clean coal technologies and abatement measures.

10) ENV8 ‘Biodiversity’ will safeguard and enhance biodiversity and geological heritage, and ensure that the natural environment functions as an integrated network of habitats.

11) ENV10 ‘Landscape’ seeks to safeguard and enhance landscapes that contribute to the distinctive character of Yorkshire and the Humber, including derelict and spoiled urban fringe landscapes in the former coalfield and older industrial parts of South Yorkshire.

7

12) ENV11 ‘Health, Recreation and Sport’ seeks to improve the health of residents by focusing, concentrating and supporting economic development in and around regional and sub regional cities and towns; providing and enhancing high quality facilities for sport and recreation and maximising opportunities to develop walking and cycling routes and other green infrastructure.

13) E1 ‘Creating a Successful and Competitive Regional Economy’ seeks to create a successful and competitive regional economy by encouraging economic growth particularly of the knowledge driven economy.

14) E3 ‘Land and Premises for Economic Development’ aims to locate economic development on previously developed land and current land allocations.

15) H1 ‘Provision and Distribution Housing’ refers to the need to improve and increase housing stock for all households wanting homes, taking account of strong economic growth in the Leeds City Region, regeneration and increasing economic growth in South Yorkshire.

16) H2 ‘Managing and Stepping up the Supply and Delivery of Housing’ supports the delivery of the required homes the Local Authority should prioritise on brownfield land and coordinate housing with provision of the necessary green social and physical infrastructure.

17) H4 ‘The Provision of Affordable Housing’ states that the Region needs to increase its provision of affordable housing and estimates that this could to be up to 30% in Rotherham.

18) H5 ‘Housing Mix’ seeks the provision of homes for a mix of households reflecting the needs of the area.

19) T1 ‘Personal Travel Reduction and Modal Shift’ aims to reduce travel demand, traffic growth and congestion, shift to modes with lower environmental impact, and improve journey time reliability.

20) T3 ‘Public Transport’ states that public transport infrastructure and services should be safeguarded and improved and development should make use of existing public transport services or provide a focus for viable new services. Services should be available as soon as development commences and priority will be given to the provisions for strategic bus based Park and Ride facilities.

Local Planning Policy in the UDP

8 1) HG4.3 ‘Windfall Sites’ states that proposals for housing development will be determined in light of their location within the existing built-up area.

2) HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’ states that the Council will encourage the use of best practice in housing layout and design in order to provide developments which enhance the quality of the residential environment.

3) EC3.3 ‘Other Development within Industrial and Business Areas’ sets out that other development will be accepted subject to no adverse effect on the character of the area or on residential amenity and that it can be demonstrated that there are no suitable alternative locations available for the proposed development.

4) ENV1 ‘Green Belt’ states that only development essential for the use of agriculture, forestry or open recreation will be allowed unless there are very special circumstances.

5) ENV1.4 ‘Land Adjacent to the Green Belt’ aims to ensure that development is sympathetic to the environmental quality and appearance of adjacent Green belt land.

6) ENV2 ‘Conserving the Environment’ looks to ensure that development takes into account the impact on wildlife and historic and geological resources.

7) ENV2.4 ‘Enhancing Environmental Resources’ the Council will support the positive promotion and enhancement of the Borough’s environmental resources.

8) ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’ recognises the vital importance of maintaining and enhancing the landscape of the Borough.

9) ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ aims to ensure that development should not be at the expense of the local environment and the character and appearance of the area. The Policy aims to achieve environmental improvements through an appropriate standard of design, layout and landscaping.

10) ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ seeks to minimise the impact of development on the environment and looks to protect it from, for example, pollution or flooding. It also states that development leading to a significant loss of trees will be permitted only where there is compelling justification for doing so.

9 11) ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ aims to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development.

12) ENV4.1 ‘Improvement Schemes’ supports and promotes initiatives which will enhance and improve the quality of the Borough’s built environment.

13) ENV4.3 ‘Unstable Land’ states that developments will need to demonstrate that any potential for ground instability has been investigated.

14) ENV4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’ requires the applicant to undertake contamination surveys and recommend measures to treat/remove any contamination identified, on land which may be contaminated by previous industrial uses.

15) T2 ‘Major Road Schemes and Highway Improvements’ promotes appropriate schemes on the Major Road Network and other main road schemes which improves access to the national motorway and trunk road network, reduce congestion and support the development of strategic regeneration areas.

16) T3 ‘Public Transport’ supports the development and improvement of facilities for users of public transport in both rural and urban areas.

17) T3.1 ‘Bus Priority Measures and New Systems’ makes provision, where appropriate for bus priority measures in addition to investigating scope for the development of new transport systems on key corridors within the Borough.

18) T4 ‘Traffic Management’ promotes comprehensive traffic management schemes.

19) T6 ‘Location and Layout of Development’ aims to locate development close to public transport, discourage development which causes traffic congestion and promote safe and convenient access for pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities, as well as ensuring highway safety for car and public transport users.

20) T7 ‘Public Rights of Way’ indicates that these will be safeguarded, maintained, promoted and created as appropriate.

21) RET1.1 ‘Shopping Environment’ indicates that the Council will sustain and enhance the vitality, viability and regeneration of defined town centres.

10 22) RET6 ‘Local Shopping Provision’ supports development proposals for convenience shopping facilities serving local communities.

23) CR1 ‘Community and Social Provision’ seeks to enable the provision and retention of a range of community and social facilities.

24) CR2.1 ‘Outdoor Playing Space Standards’ seeks to achieve and maintain the NPFA minimum standard for outdoor playing space of 2.4ha per 1,000 population, accessible to residential areas.

25) UTL1 ‘Safeguarding Utility Infrastructure’ states that ‘the Council, in consultation with the utility companies, will require that development proposals take into account any existing and new service infrastructure requirements, such as major pipelines, transmission lines, telecommunications networks, distribution mains, sewers, sewerage treatment works, land drainage systems, flood defences ….’

26) UTL2 ‘Utility Services for New Development’ seeks to control the use of development of land having had regard to the efficient provision of gas, water, drainage, electricity and telecommunication services to and within areas of future development.

27) UTL3 ‘Environmental Impact of Service Installations’ seeks to ensure that the utility companies and agencies avoid or minimise the adverse landscape and environmental impacts of transmission lines and installations.

28) UTL3.3 ‘Energy Conservation’ encourages new development proposals which promote and improve energy efficiency.

29) UTL3.4 ‘Renewable Energy’ favours proposals for the generation of power from renewable energy sources unless the proposed development would cause demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance.

Other relevant material considerations

1. PPS1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ sets out the overarching planning policies on delivery of sustainable development through the planning system. Sustainable development is defined as the core principle underpinning planning and incorporates strong, vibrant and sustainable communities; protection and enhancement of the environment; prudent use of natural resources; and sustainable economic development.

11

2. Supplement to PPS1 ’Planning and Climate Change’ sets out how planning, in providing for the new homes, jobs and infrastructure needed by communities, should help shape places with lower carbon emissions and be resilient to the climate change now accepted as inevitable.

3. PPG2 ‘Green Belts’ states that the most important attribute of Green Belts are their openness and character. Paragraph 3.2 states that: - “Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. It is for the applicant to show why permission should be granted. Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist unless the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.“

4. PPS3 ‘Housing’ was updated in November 2006 and encourages the creation of mixed communities of a variety of housing in terms of tenure, price and households. A key objective is that Local Planning Authorities should continue to make effective use of land by re-using land that has been previously developed. When identifying previously developed land for housing development consideration has to be given to sustainability issues. Efficient use of land is also a key consideration and 30 dwellings per hectare net should be used as a national indicative minimum. Careful attention to design is fundamental to using land efficiently.

5. Planning Policy Statement 4: ‘Planning for Sustainable Economic Development’ was adopted on 29 December 2009 and sets out how planning bodies should, in the wider context of delivering sustainable development, positively plan for sustainable economic growth and respond to the challenges of the global economy, in their plan policies and planning decisions

6. PPS9 ‘Biodiversity and Geological Conservation’ aims, amongst other things, to protect and enhance biodiversity as part of the development proposals.

7. PPS10 ‘Planning for Sustainable Waste Management’ forms part of the National Waste Management Plan for the UK. The overall objective is to protect human health and the environment by producing less waste by using it as a resource wherever possible.

8. PPG13 ‘Transport’ aims to increase the use of modes of transport other than the car, increase accessibility to jobs and services and reduce road traffic in the interests of sustainability and the environment.

12 9. PPG14 ‘Development on Unstable Land’ advises Local Authorities, land owners and developers on development on land which is unstable or is potentially unstable. To ensure that development is suitable and any physical constraints on land are taken into account at all stages of planning.

10. PPG17 ‘Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation’ stresses the importance for sport and recreation and improving people’s quality of life and promotes the inclusion of high quality, well managed and maintained open spaces, sports and recreational facilities.

11. PPS22 ‘Renewable Energy’ sets out how by facilitating renewable energy developments, planning can contribute to the Government’s sustainable development strategy.

12. PPS23 ‘Planning and Pollution Control’ advises that any consideration of the quality of land, air or water and potential impacts arising from development, possibly leading to impacts on health, is capable of being a material planning consideration.

13. PPG24 ‘Planning and Noise’ provides guidance to Local Authorities on the use of planning powers to minimise the adverse impact of noise through location of development and mitigation of the impact of noise.

16. PPS25 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ aims to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and to direct development away from areas at highest risk.

17. Interim Planning Statement – Affordable Housing (June 2008) states that for planning applications for 15 or more houses or sites of 0.5 hectares or more, no less than 25% of all dwellings shall be provided on site

18. DETR Circular 2/99 – Environment Impact Assessment which provides guidance on the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 for local planning authorities

19. ODPM Circular 05/05 – Planning Obligations provides guidance on the use of planning obligations in England under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as substituted by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991

20. DETR Circular 5/94 ‘Planning out Crime’ clearly states that crime prevention is a material consideration in the planning process. Providing facilities for young people to reduce crime

13 and improve community safety are clearly issues that must be considered.

2. For the following reasons:

The site is a brownfield restored opencast site located on the edge of an urban area. The potential benefits of the scheme have been weighed against the relevant local, regional and national planning guidance and where the development does not conform with the provisions of the development plan (application being a departure from the UDP), consideration has been given to other material considerations as set out in Section 38 (6) of the PCPA 2004.

The proposals would deliver much needed housing numbers in the form of a mixed and sustainable community. The release of Waverley for housing development would make a substantial contribution to the 15 year requirement and also the 5 year supply as required by PPS 3 and RSS Policy H1 ‘Provision and Distribution of Housing’ in that it will improve and increase housing stock for all households wanting homes. The proposed average net density of 55 dwellings per hectare is well above the minimum required, in the absence of a local plan policy, by PPS3. This density allows for a mixture of high medium and low density appropriate to development of this scale. The location of higher densities in the central areas will contribute to the sustainability of services in the centre of the new community and the critical mass population that the development will create is considered to be adequate to support the facilities, services and amenities proposed as part of the community.

The Environmental Statement and its various technical assessments, together with the consultation responses received from statutory consultees and other stakeholders, provide sufficient information to enable the Council to determine this application with knowledge of the likely significant impacts of the proposed development. H1 ‘Provision and Distribution of Housing’ and will improve and increase housing stock for all households wanting homes

Whilst objectors to the development have raised various issues, it is considered, for the reasons explained in the detailed analysis, that planning permission should be granted for the scheme subject to appropriate safeguards to ensure that necessary controls and mitigation measures are established. This decision is taken on the basis of the proposed controls, mitigation measures and delivery commitments contained in the conditions and Heads of Terms for the Section 106 Agreement, which are considered to provide an adequate framework of control to ensure as far as reasonably practicable that the public benefits of the scheme will be realised in accordance with relevant planning policies.

In particular the proposed development accords with RSS Policies YH7 ‘Location of New Development’, YH4 ‘Regional Cities and Sub Regional Cities and Towns’, SY1 ‘South Yorkshire Sub Area Policy in that that the development will utilise previously developed land. In addition, the proposal is considered to comply with UDP Policies HG4.3 ‘Windfall Sites’, ENV3.1

14 ‘Development and the Environment’ and T6 ‘Location and Layout of Development’, all of which encourage development where there is no adverse impact on the environment and which encourage development close to public transport provision.

In terms of National Policy PPS1 and PPS3, it is considered that the proposal accords with the key aims of these national policy documents in that the development proposals will create a mixed and sustainable community whilst providing a variety of housing in terms of tenure, price and households. Once again the proposals will make effective use of land by re-using land that has been previously developed

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning permission . More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed:

RESERVED MATTERS

01 Before the commencement of the development of the exempt infrastructure, details of the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping of the relevant development (herein referred to as the reserved matters) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

02 Before the commencement of the development of each development plot, details of the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping of the relevant development (herein referred to as the reserved matters) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

03 Applications for the approval of all the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of 30 (thirty) years from the date of this permission.

04 The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of 30 (thirty) years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of 3 (three) years from the date of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.

DESIGN CODE

05

15 Applications for the approval of the reserved matters shall be in accordance with the principles and parameters described and illustrated in the Waverley Revised Design and Access Statement (October 2009) and with the approved detailed Parameter Plans (2009), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

06 No development, except that associated with exempt infrastructure, shall take place in any of the geographical phases identified in the approved Parameter Plan 9 'Phasing' until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a design code (including a supporting plan) for the geographical phase in question. The design code shall be approved before the submission of applications for the approval of reserved matters within that geographical phase (excluding applications relating to exempt infrastructure works). The design codes for the various geographical phases shall be in accordance with the principles and parameters described and illustrated in the Waverley Revised Design and Access Statement (July 2009), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

07 The supporting plan submitted with the design code for each geographical phase as approved on Parameter Plan 9 ‘Phasing’ and referred to in condition 6 above shall be the regulating plan for the associated design code. The design code for each geographical phase shall include codes for all matters listed below:

• Sustainable Design and Construction Principles • Climate change mitigation and adaptation • Character Areas • Location of Energy Centres • Block types and uses • Building Heights • Density • Relationship between proposed Landscape and Built Form • Means of enclosure • Street Types and Street Materials • Street Tree Planting • Feature Spaces (including squares, parks and play areas) • Hard and Soft Landscape Treatments • Advanced Structure Planting and phasing of landscape implementation • Planting character and establishment considerations • Planting stock sizes including use of semi-mature tree planting • Security principles • Affordable Housing

08

16 Applications for the approval of Reserved Matters shall be in accordance with the requirements of the approved Design Code for that geographical phase of development unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

USES

09 Floorspace within Use Classes A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5 hereby approved shall not exceed 5,400 sqm. The Use Classes are those set out in the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification.

10 No development, except that associated with exempt infrastructure, shall take place in any of the geographical phases identified in the approved Parameter Plan 9 ‘Phasing’ until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan detailing the quantum of floorspace and timescales for delivery of the A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5 use classes for the geographical phase in question. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved phasing plan.

11 A minimum of 1,300 sqm and a maximum of 1,900 sqm of gross retail floorspace (Class A1) shall be provided within the development.

12 No more than 1,300 sqm of gross A1 floorspace shall be provided in any one unit.

13 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order, there shall be no change of use between Use Classes A2, A3, A4, A5 to a use within Class A1 without prior planning permission.

14 The hotel shall not be first open to trade until phase 4 of the development as identified in the approved Parameter Plan 9 ‘Phasing’ unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

15 Prior to the construction of development, except that associated with exempt infrastructure, within each geographical phase as identified on Parameter Plan 9 ‘Phasing’, an affordable housing schedule for that geographical phase, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The affordable housing schedule shall show the distribution of affordable dwellings across the phase.

17

16 The submission of each Reserved Matters application for residential development shall show the number of affordable dwellings to be provided in accordance with the affordable housing schedule for the relevant phase within which the application falls, together with the mix of dwellings in terms of the number of bedrooms and the proportion of houses and flats, broken down between social rented affordable housing units and shared ownership units. Affordable Housing shall thereafter be provided in accordance with the approved Reserved Matters.

SUSTAINABILITY AND ENERGY

17 Each reserved matters application within geographical phases 1a and 1b as identified on the phasing plan in the revised Energy Strategy (October 2009) shall be accompanied by a scheme detailing how the dwellings applied for shall achieve at least Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. The development shall thereafter be carried out in full accordance with the approved scheme.

18 With the exception of the 915 dwellings that comprise phase 1a and 1b as identified on the phasing plan in the revised Energy Strategy (October 2009) no residential development shall take place until the Local Planning Authority has been provided with, and approved in writing, a Pre-Assessment carried out by a Building Research Establishment (BRE) Licensed Code for Sustainable Homes Assessor, proving that each dwelling proposed as part of the reserved matters application in question has been designed to achieve at least Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes (or equivalent level of such national measure of sustainability for house design that replaces the Code). This information shall be submitted and approved as part of the submission of each reserved matters application that includes residential development. Each residential building, of which the reserved matters application in question relates, shall then be the subject to a post completion check by the licensed assessor (after the Design Stage report has been carried out and an interim certificate obtained) and issue of a final Code certificate of compliance prior to its first occupation.

19 The 18,698 square metres of A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, B1(a), C1, D1 and D2 floorspace hereby approved shall be designed to achieve a BREEAM Very Good rating as a minimum. Relevant applications for approval of Reserved Matters shall be accompanied by a BREEAM Report which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The buildings shall subsequently be developed in accordance with the approved details.

20 Relevant reserved matters application shall be accompanied by a report which shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority

18 setting out the measures to incorporate green roofs in the design as part of proposals for storm water retention and attenuation, energy conservation and biodiversity gain. Thereafter the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

GROUNDWATER / CONTAMINATION AND GROUND CONDITIONS

21 No development shall be commenced within each geographical phase as identified in Parameter Plan 9 ‘Phasing’ until the Global Validation Report for that phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This report will cover all the following issues:

1. Investigation and geotechnical stability assessment of opencast backfill together with any special requirements to protect buildings and infrastructure against adverse settlement. 2. Investigation of possible shallow mine workings outside the area of opencast workings together with any mitigation measures required to protect overlying development. 3. Investigation of any mine entries outside the area of opencast workings together with any mitigation measure required. 4. Human health risk assessment together with any required mitigation. 5. Groundwater risk assessment and any on-going groundwater monitoring required by the environment agency. 6. Ground gas risk assessment and any methods required to prevent ground gas ingress into buildings.

22 If during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site, then no further development shall be carried out in the vicinity of the impact until the developer has submitted and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, a strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.

BIODIVERSITY

23 Within 5 years of the date of this permission or prior to the first occupation of the first dwelling, whichever is the sooner, an Ecological Management Strategy incorporating a Biodiversity Action Plan and Wildlife Management File shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Information to be included shall consist of the following:

• The Wildlife Management File – providing management standards, appropriate assessment requirements and methodology, legal constraints and compliance, responsibilities for implementation, monitoring and consultation. • Site Biodiversity Action Plan – providing audit of habitats and species within the site or with the potential to access the site, aims

19 and targeted objectives for protection and enhancement of the site’s biodiversity interest. • Management Activity Plans – providing detailed annual management action plans, annual monitoring proposals, phased development proposals and to detail the cross-over of activity planning from the LDA Establishment Management Plan to the long-term management plan. • Plans illustrating coverage of management responsibilities, habitat management compartments, key management objectives and development phasing. • Data Agreement – providing commitment to submit monitoring data to the Rotherham Biological Records Centre in an appropriate format.

MANAGEMENT PLAN

24 A Green Infrastructure Delivery Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 5 years of the grant of this permission or upon the first occupation, whichever is sooner. The Delivery Plan shall be produced for the whole application site for a period of 5 years from completion of the final dwelling. The Plan shall be carried out as approved and any subsequent variations shall be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The Delivery Plan shall demonstrate how public realm and green infrastructure management will be delivered to a high standard of safety and quality across the site. Within this plan site management objectives will be identified (these will include but not be limited to landscape, ecology, visitor and recreational management), potential conflicts arising from site management and their resolution and the management, and maintenance regimes required to achieve the objectives given. The delivery plan shall set standards, and schedule work in order to ensure the safe and managed use of the site, the protection of wildlife and supporting habitat, and to promote the continuity of effective management throughout development phases.

LANDSCAPE

25 Prior to the commencement of any development within each geographical phase as identified on Parameter Plan 9 ‘Phasing’, details of a phased scheme of advance planting to provide screen planting to site boundaries (wherever relevant) and structure planting along access roads and associated with key entrances and junctions shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The said planting shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

HIGHWAYS

26

20 No more than 180 No. dwellings shall be occupied on site until the proposed improvements to A630 Parkway/B6533 Poplar Way/Europa Way junction, indicated on plan No. 22103701/06, have been implemented in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

27 No more than 550 No. dwellings shall be occupied on site until the proposed improvements to B6066 Highfield Spring and to B6533 Poplar Way/B6066 Poplar Way/ B6066 Highfield Spring junction, indicated on plan No. PO-CE- WYG-01-SK40 have been implemented in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

28 No more than 550 No. dwellings shall be occupied on site until the proposed improvements to B6066 Highfield Spring/Brunel Way (AMP North) as indicated on plan No. PO-CE-WYG-01-SK41 have been implemented in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

29 The development shall not be commenced until details of the proposed improvements to B6533 Poplar Way/B6066 Orgreave Road, as indicated in draft form on plans Nos. H-PL-09 and PO-CE-WYG-PL-09 have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the approved details shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of any dwellings.

30 No more than 1880 No. dwellings shall be occupied on site until the proposed improvements to B6066 Highfield Spring/B6066 Highfield Lane, as indicated on plan No. PO-CE-WYG-01-SK17 have been implemented in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

31 No more than 550 No. dwellings shall be occupied on site until the proposed improvements to B6066 Main Street/B6067 Treeton Lane, Catcliffe, as indicated on plan No. PO-CE-WYG-01-SK28, have been implemented in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority

32 No more than 1700 No. dwellings shall be occupied on site until the proposed improvements to B6066 Highfield Lane/Orgreave Lane/Rotherham Road junction, as indicated on plan No. PO-CE-WYG-01-SK29, have been implemented in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

33

21 No more than 370 No. dwellings shall be occupied on site until the proposed improvements to B6200 Retford Road/Rotherham Road junction as indicated on plan No. PO-CE-WYG-01-SK30, have been implemented in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

34 No more than 550 No. dwellings shall be occupied on site until the proposed improvement to B6533 Poplar Way between Highfield Spring and Parkway junction to a dual carriageway as indicated on plan No. SK-J2/3-M1 Rev P2 submitted with planning application RB2004/0046 has been implemented in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority unless already implemented as part of an adjacent development.

35 No more than 2,500 No. dwellings shall be occupied until the proposed improvements to Junction 33, M1 Motorway have been implemented in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved by the LPA. These proposed works shall include carriageway widening on parts of the circulatory carriageway. In the event that the Highways Agency has an approved improvement scheme for this junction, then this requirement shall be replaced by the financial contribution to works as described in the S106 Agreement relating to this development.

36 If, 24 months after the occupation of the first dwelling, the proposal to implement a Bus Rapid Transit scheme to the site is not committed then a scheme to enhance bus services in the area shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority together with a programme for implementation.

37 A detailed assessment shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority on the Orgreave Lane / Retford Road junction to determine if mitigation of traffic signal operation is required. Any mitigation identified shall thereafter be carried out within a timescale to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

38 Prior to the construction of any buildings on site a detailed assessment shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority on the Orgreave Lane / Retford Road junction to determine if any mitigation is required to the operation of the traffic signals. Any mitigation identified shall thereafter be carried out within a timescale to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

NOISE

39

22 Each reserved matters application shall be accompanied by an appropriate noise assessment to ensure the amenity of current and future residents in accordance with BS4142 and PPG24.

40 Throughout the construction phases of development and except in cases of emergency, no operation that is likely to give rise to noise nuisance or loss of amenity shall take place on site other than between the hours of 0730 to 1800 Monday to Friday and between 0800 to 1300 on Saturdays.

Operations which give rise to noise nuisance shall not be carried out on Sundays, Public Holidays or outside normal weekday working hours. At times when operations are not permitted work shall be limited to maintenance and servicing of plant or other work of an essential or emergency nature. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified at the earliest opportunity of the occurrence of any such emergency and a schedule of essential work shall be provided.

41 Throughout the construction phases of development all machinery and vehicles employed on the site shall be fitted with effective silencers of a type appropriate to their specification and at all times the best practicable means shall be employed to prevent or counteract the effects of noise emitted by vehicles, plant, machinery or otherwise arising from on-site activities.

42 Throughout the construction phases of development all vehicles reversing warning alarm systems shall be operated in accordance with a specification submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development. At all times, effective means shall be employed to prevent and counteract the effects of audible warning alarms to nearby noise sensitive receptors. No audible warning alarm shall exceed the ambient noise level in the working location by more than 5dBA.

43 Prior to the commencement of site operations and development the operator shall nominate a qualified person to be responsible for immediate investigation of complaints. Prior to the commencement of the operations the Local Planning Authority shall be informed of the appointment, and the arrangements to be employed shall be agreed. A log of all complaints shall be kept and made available on request to the Local Planning Authority.

DUST

44 At all times during the carrying out of development authorised or required under this permission, effective means shall be employed to minimise dust. Such measures shall include water bowsers, sprayers whether mobile or fixed, or similar equipment, upward pointing exhausts, wind fences, landscaping bunds, stockpile dampening, aerodynamic shaping of stockpiles

23 to prevent dust lift off, regulating the speed of vehicles, hard covering of roadways and other steps as are appropriate.

45 At such times during construction of development when due to site conditions the prevention of dust nuisance by these means is considered by the Local Planning Authority in consultations with the site operator to be impracticable, then movements of soils, overburden and other dust raising materials shall be temporarily curtailed until such time as the site/weather conditions improve such as to permit a resumption of the operations.

WHEEL WASHING

46 Throughout the construction phases of development the operator shall install and thereafter utilise as appropriate, wheel washing facilities on the site for the duration of the construction. Prior to its installation on site, full details of its specification and siting shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

DRAINAGE AND FLOOD RISK

47 The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) by White Young Green dated 06/10/09 including the following specific measures detailed within the Flood Risk Assessment:

1) Areas of the site covered by Flood Zones 2 and 3 are developed with acceptable water compatible development only, as defined by Table D2 of PPS25 (as stated on p.18 of the FRA) 2) Finished floor levels are set at a minimum of 150mm above adjacent finished ground levels (as stated on p.18 of the FRA)

48 The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as details of potential overland flood routes through the site (detailed flood routes) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Each reserved matters application shall include details of the overland flood routes for the geographical phase in question and a scheme detailing how safe access and egress within and to the outside of the site during a flood event will be achieved.

Thereafter the scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.

49

24 No development within each geographical phase as identified in Parameter Plan 9 ‘Phasing’ except that associated with the exempt infrastructure and site preparation works, shall take place or discharge to a drainage system, until the detailed design of the Surface Water Drainage scheme (including appropriate SUDS), including all relevant flood risk assessments within the Waverley development, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme as approved for each geographical phase of development shall be in accordance with the Outline Surface Water Strategy and the Flood Risk Assessment submitted with the application in October 2009 and shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the construction of 80% of dwellings within that development phase.

The scheme shall also include the following: 1. Details of the development surface water drainage network, which shall include: • the piped drainage network and open watercourses will drain to the attenuation reservoirs. • the reservoirs will limit discharge to the River Rother at the maximum rate of 5 litre per second per hectare. • the open watercourses shall be designed for the 1 in 100 year return period over the critical storm duration (plus an allowance of 30 % for climate change) and 600 mm freeboard for each watercourse. • the piped drainage network will be designed so that there is no flooding during a 1 in 30 year storm over the critical storm duration • the water velocity within the open watercourses shall be a maximum of 3 metres per second, unless otherwise agreed by the Environment Agency. • Appropriate SUDS will be incorporated into the surface water drainage scheme within the site. 2. Plans to show the catchment areas for surface water runoff within the site and surrounding areas, for each phase of the development (to ensure that there is adequate capacity for discharge of surface water runoff within each section of the drainage system, during and after completion of the development). 3. Details of how the current restoration drainage will fit within the proposed development drainage plans and the Masterplan, in particular Handsworth Beck and drainage channels C and C2. 4. Details of how the scheme shall be maintained and managed during and after the completion of the development. This should also include details of satisfactory easement strips along the piped network and open watercourses, to allow access for maintenance.

PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY

50 All public rights of way proposed throughout the site shall be implemented in accordance with the Public Rights of Way Action Plan or any subsequent

25 variations of the plan as agreed between the Borough Council Rights of Way Team and developer. Suitable access barriers and fencing shall be agreed in writing to Local Planning Authority and be installed on the end of all path links.

WASTE MANAGEMENT

51 The Design Code as required by Condition 7 of this approval shall incorporate a waste and recycling storage plan, including details of recycling facilities for those items not currently collected at source such as glass and plastic, identifying the facilities to be provided to serve that phase of development for each geographical phase of development as identified in Parameter Plan 9 ‘Phasing’. Thereafter waste and recycling facilities shall be provided in accordance with the approved details before the relevant buildings are occupied.

REASONS FOR CONDITIONS

01 No details of the matters referred to having been submitted, they are reserved for the subsequent approval of the Local Planning Authority and to comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

02 No details of the matters referred to having been submitted, they are reserved for the subsequent approval of the Local Planning Authority and to comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

03 To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

04 To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

05 To ensure high standards of urban design and comprehensively planned development are designed and phased to ensure maximum practical integration between different land uses to accord with policies ENV3.1 'Development and the Environment' and ENV3.2 'Minimising the Impact of Development' of the adopted Rotherham UDP (adopted June 1999).

06 To ensure high standards of urban design and comprehensively planned development are designed and phased to ensure maximum practical integration between different land uses to accord with policies ENV3.1

26 'Development and the Environment' and ENV3.2 'Minimising the Impact of Development' of the adopted Rotherham UDP (adopted June 1999).

07 To ensure high standards of urban design and comprehensively planned development and designed and phased to ensure maximum practical integration between different land uses to accord with policies ENV3.1 'Development and the Environment' and ENV3.2 'Minimising the Impact of Development' of the adopted Rotherham UDP (adopted June 1999).

08 To ensure high standards of urban design and comprehensively planned development are designed and phased to ensure maximum practical integration between different land uses to accord with policies ENV3.1 'Development and the Environment' and ENV3.2 'Minimising the Impact of Development' of the adopted Rotherham UDP (adopted June 1999).

09 The outline planning application proposed 5,400 sqm of floorspace within use classes A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5, which the Council considers sufficient to achieve the objectives of policy RET6 ‘Local Shopping Provision’ of the adopted Rotherham UDP (adopted June 1999).

10 In order to ensure that sufficient floorspace is provided to accommodate a range of retail, and leisure uses needed to serve a sustainable community in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 3 ‘Housing’.

11 In order to ensure the retail floorspace is of the type and scale for which a need has been identified and which is appropriate to the scale of the neighbourhood centre, in accordance with Policy RET6 ‘Local Planning Provision’ of the Adopted Rotherham UDP and with Planning Policy Statement 4 ‘Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth’.

12 In order to ensure the retail floorspace is of the type and scale for which a need has been identified and which is appropriate to the scale of the neighbourhood centre, in accordance with Policy RET6 ‘Local Planning Provision’ of the Adopted Rotherham UDP and with Planning Policy Statement 4 ‘Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth’.

13 In order to ensure the retail floorspace is of the type and scale for which a need has been identified and which is appropriate to the scale of the neighbourhood centre, in accordance with Policy RET6 ‘Local Planning Provision’ of the Adopted Rotherham UDP and with Planning Policy Statement 4 ‘Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth’.

14

27 In order to ensure that the development is phased properly to allow the site to be developed for mixed use community.

15 To ensure that the distribution of affordable housing assists in the creation of an inclusive mixed community in accordance with the provisions of PPS3.

16 To ensure that the distribution of affordable housing assists in the creation of an inclusive mixed community in accordance with the provisions of PPS3.

17 To achieve improved energy conservation and the protection of environmental resources and to accord with RSS policy YH2 ‘Climate Change and Resource Use’ and ENV5 ‘Energy’.

18 To achieve improved energy conservation and the protection of environmental resources and to accord with RSS policy YH2 ‘Climate Change and Resource Use’ and ENV5 ‘Energy’.

19 In order to secure a sustainable development in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 1 ‘Creating Sustainable Communities’ and Regional Spatial Strategy YH2.

20 In accordance with RSS Policy YH2 and in order to secure a sustainable development in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 1 ’Creating Sustainable Communities.’

21 To protect the water environment by ensuring that the site is remediated to an appropriate standard, to ensure that adequate measures have been undertaken to mitigate against contaminated land and to ensure that the site is capable of withstanding development in accordance with UDP Policies ENV4.3 ‘Unstable Land’ and ENV4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’ and PPS23 ‘Planning and Pollution Control and PPG14 ‘Development on Unstable Land’.

22 To protect the water environment by ensuring that the site is remediated to an appropriate standard.

23 To provide good quality and ecologically rich habitats and to mitigate for disturbance of habitats and protect species using them in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation.

24

28 To ensure that the future management maintenance repair and upkeep of the development is delivered to an appropriately high standard of safety and quality across the whole development.

25 To ensure an appropriate standard of visual amenity in the local area.

26 In the interests of highway safety.

27 In the interests of highway safety.

28 In the interests of highway safety.

29 In the interests of highway safety.

30 In the interests of highway safety.

31 In the interests of highway safety.

32 In the interests of highway safety.

33 In the interests of highway safety.

34 In the interests of highway safety.

35 In the interests of highway safety.

36 In order to promote sustainable transport choices.

37 In the interests of highway safety.

38 In the interests of highway safety.

39 To protect the amenity of future residents in accordance with PPG24.

40

29 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

41 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

42 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

43 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

44 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

45 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

46 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

47 To reduce the impact and risk of flooding on the proposed development and future occupants.

48 To reduce the impact and risk of flooding on the proposed development and future occupants. To ensure safe access and egress from the site.

49 To prevent the increased risk of flooding and ensure future maintenance of the surface water drainage system both within each phase of development and within the Waverley development.

50 To ensure adequate pedestrian and cycle links and recreational use throughout the site.

51 To ensure that the development provides adequate facilities for waste collection and promotes recycling in accordance with PPS1.

30

INFORMATIVES

• All highway improvements identified require detailed design and road safety audits, accordingly the final layout may vary from those shown on the draft layouts submitted as part of the application. The detailed designs will need to consider giving priority to the Bus Rapid Transit service.

• This is an outline application with means of access hereby approved. No internal roads shown on the Framework Plan are included in this approval and are therefore subject to a separate planning application.

Environment Agency

• In England, it is a legal requirement to have a site waste management plan (SWMP) for all new construction projects worth more than £300,000.The level of detail that a SWMP should contain depends on the estimated build cost, excluding VAT. The developer must also comply with the duty of care for waste, however, undertaking a SWMP will assist the developer in complying with this because of the requirement to record all waste movements in one document. Further information can be found at http://www.netregs-swmp.co.uk .

• If any controlled waste is to be removed off site, then site operator must ensure a registered waste carrier is used to convey the waste material off site to a suitably authorised facility.

• If the operator would like more specific advice regarding waste management, they will need to contact the Environment Management Team at our Rotherham offices on 01709 312785 or look at available guidance on our website www.environment- agency.gov.uk/subjects/waste/ .

• The Duty of Care regulations for dealing with waste materials are applicable for any off-site movements of wastes. The developer, as waste producer, therefore has a duty of care to ensure all materials removed go to an appropriate licensed disposal site and all relevant documentation is completed and kept in line with regulations.

• If any waste is to be used on site, the applicant will be required to obtain the appropriate exemption or authorisation from us. We are unable to specify what exactly would be required if anything, due to the limited amount of information provided. If the applicant wishes more specific advice they will need to contact the Environment Management Team at our Rotherham office on 01709 312785 or look at available guidance on our website http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/subjects/waste .

31

• In accordance with the waste hierarchy, we recommend that the applicant considers reduction, reuse and recovery of waste in preference to off site incineration and disposal to landfill during site construction.

• Waste stored on site should be kept securely. Any liquid wastes produced on site should be kept within suitable containers and within a bunded area or on a drip tray and removed from site as soon as possible. Any non-hazardous waste produced on site should be stored for no longer than 12 months. No waste material can be burnt on site with the exception of waste applicable within a paragraph 30 exemption.

• The Environment Agency recommends that in areas at risk of flooding, consideration be given to the incorporation of flood proofing measures into the design and construction of the development. These include barriers on ground floor doors, windows and access points and bring in electrical services into the building at a high level so that plugs are located above possible flood levels.

• Additional guidance can be found in the Environment Agency Flood Line Publication ‘Damage Limitation’. A free copy of this is available by telephoning 0845 988 1188 or can be found on out website www.environment-agency.gove.uk click on ‘flood’ in subject to find out about, and then ‘floodline’.

• Reference should also be made to the Department for Communities and Local Government publication ‘Preparing for Floods’ please email: [email protected] for a copy.

• Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991, and the Yorkshire Land Drainage Byelaws, the prior written consent of the Environment Agency is required for any proposed works or structures, in, under, over or within 8 metres of the top of the bank of the River Rother, designated a ‘main river’.

• Erection of flow control structures or any culverting of a watercourse requires the prior written approval of the Environment Agency under S.23 of the Land Drainage Act 1991 or S.109 of the Water Resource Act 1991. The Environment Agency resists culverting on nature conservation and other grounds and consent for such works will not normally be granted except for access crossings.

• Approval will be required for future works to Handsworth Beck, which runs through the development site.

Coal Authority

32 • Any intrusive activities which intersect, disturb or enter any coal seams, coal mine workings or coal mine entries (shafts and adits) require the prior written permission of the Coal Authority. In the interest of public safety, the Coal Authority is concerned that risks specific to the nature of coal and coal mine workings are identified and mitigated. Further information can be obtained from the Services section of the Coal Authority’s website at: www.coal.gov.uk/services .

South Yorkshire Mineral Advisory Service

• In consideration of PPG14 the applicant is advised to consult with the Coal Authority, the National House Building Council and any other relevant body regarding hether construction directly above the Orgreave Colliery shafts is advisable and if consideration should be given to a suitably sized no build zones above their position.

• Responsibility and subsequent liability for safe development and secure occupancy of the site rests with the developer and/or land owner. The LPA has used its best endeavours to determine the application on the basis of the information available; this does not mean the land will be totally free from instability. The question of stability is a material planning consideration and resolution of this issue does not necessarily imply that the requirements of any other controlling authority would be satisfied; in particular the granting of planning permission does not give a warranty of support or stability.

Sport England

• Any off or on-site sport provision should ensure community access agreements are put in place, to allow for extended public participation in sport. A template for advancing this is available on the Sport England website at: www.sportengland.org/facilities_planning/planning_contribution/local_fr ameworks/part5.aspx

• New facilities provided or existing facilities to be upgraded off-site should meet Sport England design guidance which can be found on out website at: www..sportengland.org/facilities_planning/design_guidance_notes.asp x.

National Grid

• In the event of these proposed works going ahead at a future date, they may adversely impact the safety and integrity of our apparatus and place you or your employees and the general public at risk. Please contact Plant Protection (National Grid, Block 1, Floor 2, Brick Kiln Street, Hinckley, LE10 0NA; 0800 688 588; [email protected]) 10 days prior to works, quoting the enquiry reference number (EM_TN_F_00391).

33

34

Background

The site has an extensive history of coal mining and associated industrial activity dating back over 200 years. In conjunction with coal mining taking place, a coke works and bio product plant was built in 1919 and operated until its closure in 1990. Since then a number of planning applications have been submitted for the extraction of coal by opencast methods and proposals for the site’s restoration. These are listed below:

RB1993/1058P - Extraction of coal by opencast methods together with all ancillary operations (car park, plant yard, temporary offices, water treatment areas and sewage treatment facilities), the creation and use of waste disposal facility for dealing with contaminated and landfill waste from the proposed site, the construction of a new highway between the B6066 Orgreave railway bridge and the B6533 Homeworld roundabout, the diversion of the River Rother, the carrying out of tip washing, hot coal recovery and the restoration of the area including the area known as Woodhouse Mill Tip - Granted Conditionally - 21/12/1994.

RB1997/0101 - Variation of condition 31 (hours of working) imposed by R93/1058P to permit 24 hour operation of the coal washing plant (Monday to Friday) for the duration of coal recovery from the former colliery spoil tip. – WITHDRAWN.

RB2003/1640 - Continuation of opencast coal and reclamation operations without compliance with condition 2 of planning permission R93/1058P dated 21/12/94, together with revisions to approved restoration contours - GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 01/07/2004.

RB2005/1236 - Application under section 73 for the continuation of opencast coal and reclamation operations, without compliance with condition No 3 (Restoration/landscaping/future management/aftercare, details to be submitted for approval) and No 47 (Details of trees, shrubs and hedgerows to be submitted) imposed by RB2003/1640 to allow details to be submitted before 1st July 2006 - GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 09/09/2005

RB2006/2197 - Application for variation to condition 2 (details of restoration/landscaping to be submitted within 12 months) & condition 3 (details of trees/shrubs/hedgerows to be submitted within 12 months) imposed by RB2005/1236 and variation to condition 55 (details of water body & impact on River Rother to be submitted within 24 months) imposed by RB2003/1640 to allow the details to be submitted by September 2007 - GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 16/08/2007.

RB2007/2205 - Application to extend the time period for completion of the restoration of the site (non-compliance with condition 1 of RB2003/1640 which required completion by May 2008) to May 2009 - GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 07/02/2008.

35 RB2008/1918 - Application to extend the time period for completion of the restoration of the site (variation of condition 1 imposed by RB2007/2205 which required completion by 15 May 2009) to 31 December 2010. - GRANTED CONDITIONALLY 19/03/2009.

Environmental Impact

The proposed development falls within Schedule 2(10)b of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (the EIA Regulations) as an ‘urban development project’ on an area over 0.5 hectares.

The proposed development is considered to have the potential to give rise to significant environmental effects, including cumulative effects in combination with the adjacent proposed office development. Accordingly, the proposed development is regarded as ‘EIA development’ and is the subject of an environmental impact assessment (EIA) under the EIA regulations.

Site Description and Location

The application site occupies an area of approximately 230 hectares and comprises the major part of the former Orgreave opencast mining site. Opencast mining operations ceased in January 2006 and the site is currently being restored and compacted in accordance with the approved details of application ref: RB2008/1918. To the north of the site is 20 hectares of land known as Highfield Commercial and beyond is the Advanced Manufacturing Park (AMP) which is approximately 40 hectares in area. Together the separate developments form a part of the overall Waverley site.

The site is located equidistance from Rotherham and Sheffield town and city centres and is currently primarily accessed off the Sheffield Parkway. It is surrounded by the outlying villages of Catcliffe to the northeast, Treeton to the east, Orgreave and Woodhouse Mill to the south and Handsworth to the west. The site is bound to the east in part by the River Rother and the Rotherham/Chesterfield freight railway line, to the south by the Cranbrook housing estate and to the southwest by the Sheffield to Lincoln railway. The northern boundary abuts the Highfield Commercial development site except for an access to the Sheffield Parkway.

The site is now in the final stages of restoration and can be divided into four main zones:

1. An engineered landfill cell containing contaminated material. This forms a prominent grassed mound on the central part of the site, close to the western boundary. 2. Three interlinked lakes to the south of the site, which will function as balancing reservoirs for site runoff. 3. The River Rother corridor, which comprises the realigned river, with established vegetation and a strip of undisturbed land along its eastern bank.

36 4. The development platforms, which comprise a series of grassed plateaux occupying the northern part of the site.

In terms of topography, the site falls in a south easterly direction towards the River Rother. There are considerable topographical variations within the site, with the containment cell reaching the highest elevation and the lakes occupying a depression separated from the river corridor. The topography of the site means that the Highfield Commercial site is situated several meters below the road known as Highfield Spring and the overall fall from this site to the waterfront (lakes) has a slope of approximately 1 in 30.

Proposal The application for the Waverley New Community is made in outline with access to be considered and all other matters reserved for subsequent approval. The application relates to approximately 230 hectares of land, which includes the area of land which historically contained the coke works and the area of green belt to the south east. The proposals involve a mixed use development, which would include the following:

• 3,890 dwellings; • 2 x 2 Form Entry Primary Schools; • 3,186 square metres of A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5 floorspace, including: o Food Store o Pub / Restaurants o Cafes o Post Office o Dry Cleaners o Chemist o Sports Shop • 4,190 square metres of D1 and D2 floorspace including: o Community Centre o Library o Health Centre o 2 no. Commercial Gyms • 5,600 square metre Hotel • 130 hectares of public open space • Sports provision including: o 2 no. Junior Pitches within the school grounds o 1 no. Neighbourhood Equipped Area for Play (NEAP) o 3 no. Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP) o 7 no. Local Area for Play (LAP) o 1 no. Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) o 2 no. Youth Shelters • 2 no. Combined Heat and Power plants

37

The Revised Design and Access Statement (DAS) explains and illustrates in broad terms how the uses will be distributed across the site, and how accessibility between all of the different parts of the development will be maximised. In addition, the application is accompanied by a framework plan, this is based around a loose grid pattern of development which has been designed to facilitate higher densities of development as well as sustainable drainage systems. At the centre of the development, a central square is proposed with a ‘spine’ running in a north westerly direction towards the Highfield Commercial site. This area will provide a range of commercial, retail, leisure and community uses in addition to a number of live/work units that will provide flexible floorspace for future residents, users and occupiers.

To the south east of the site and along the reservoir, an urban waterfront is proposed providing a mix of leisure and food and drink uses in addition to a hotel. To the north east of this area and running parallel with the River Rother is an area identified as a park. This area of land, extending to approximately 12 ha cannot be built upon due to geotechnical constraints; however proposals show that this will be excavated to accommodate a sustainable drainage system and will contain many of the aforementioned sports provision.

The framework plan also identifies a park and ride facility. This is proposed to be located in the north of the site adjacent to the existing Foers site where it is accessed off Highfield Spring; however this will be subject to a separate planning application by the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (STPTE) and the specific details do not form part of these proposals.

The proposed access into the development is from Highfield Spring, as well as through the Highfield Commercial site. Access to the site will also be via the replaced and re-aligned Highfield Lane, from Poplar Way. Members will recall that planning permission has recently been granted to extend the time period to complete restoration works, therefore re-instatement of this road is expected by December 2011. In addition, there will be improvements to off- site junctions to mitigate the impacts of additional traffic associated with this development. This includes further work to the Catcliffe dumb-bell junction with Parkway and local junctions within both Rotherham and Sheffield administrative boundaries.

Phasing The applicant has submitted a parameter plan, which provides details of phasing. At an average build-out of 200 dwellings per annum, it is anticipated that the site will take a minimum of 20 years to develop. The phasing parameter plan illustrates that development will commence on the northern side of the site, closest to Catcliffe, with the proposed park and ride facility and the central mixed use square and ‘spine’ leading to the Highfield Commercial site.

38 The second phase will continue in a southerly direction towards the reservoirs and along the realigned Highfield Lane area. The final two stages will complete the urban waterfront area before finalising the build out in the area adjacent to the existing Sheffield to Lincoln railway line and the south western element of Highfield Spring.

Length of Planning Permission In accordance with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, planning permission is sought for a period of 30 years. The applicant considers this to be a sufficient period to compete all elements of the proposed development.

Planning Performance Agreement The Council and Harworth Estates entered into a Planning Performance Agreement (PPA) prior to the submission of the application in July 2008. This is the first time RMBC have entered into such an agreement, however it was considered that the agreement would add value in terms of contributing towards a better planning decision, making the process more efficient, improving communications and making the process run more smoothly. One of the key principles of the PPA is to agree a Vision for the development, which was submitted by Harworth Estates in consultation with RMBC,and the Government’s Advisory Service for Large Applications (ATLAS). This is set out below:

“Waverley New Community will be a sustainable, well connected and well built settlement able to meet the day to day needs of its community and also contribute to meeting the needs of the wider local area. It will be a home to approximately 9,000 people and together with the AMP and Helical Governetz sites will form part of a wider community on the Waverley site.

The settlement will be physically, socially and environmentally sustainable. Transport, reinforced by a public transport hub will provide a choice of movement and modes of transport ensuring good access through the settlement and the surrounding communities and beyond. Low carbon development and sustainable energy principles will be promoted throughout the scheme as will green infrastructure.

The place will have a clear design rationale, identity, and character to which people will aspire. The design will provide robust and adaptable buildings and spaces which conform to Building for Life principles. It will provide a positive response to the characteristics of the site and area, including the open space and reservoirs to the south, employment to the north and the surrounding residential communities.

39 There will be an appropriate and sustainable mix of uses, including tenures and types of housing, and an appropriate range of facilities, amenities and social infrastructure. Good governance and management of the settlement will be important and residents will have the opportunity to become involved in this process.”

Submitted Documents The following amended documents (all dated October 2009) have been submitted in support of the planning application:

• Planning Supporting Statement including Housing Assessment The Planning Statement demonstrates that the proposed development is in accordance with National policies and the Development Plan comprising Regional and Local Plan Policies. The document also analyses RMBC housing figures and concludes that the Council does not have enough identified sites to meet the current RSS and Growth Point five year requirement. The proposals at Waverley will therefore make a significant contribution to this need as well as contributing to the regeneration of the area.

• Design and Access Statement: The Design and Access Statement’s key role is to illustrate the process that has led to the Waverley New Community development proposal and explain the design principles and concepts that have been applied to the proposed development. It also introduces the masterplan, provides general guidelines which will form the basis for the agreement of design codes and sets out detailed design guidelines, which in addition to the general and site specific design guidelines, will form the basis for the preparation of a design code for phase 1 of the development. The document concludes that the vision for the new community is for a high quality sustainable place, which is unique to Rotherham, and enhances the setting of the surrounding villages. It will also create a low car dependency travel culture and provide for a balanced community with a wide range of housing types.

• Masterplan Parameters Document The Parameter Plans show the key elements of the masterplan on which the Environmental Impact Assessment has been based and form part of the formal planning application. The Parameter Plans include the following: o Indicative Masterplan o Red Line Context o Application Site Boundary o Land Use o Density o Building Heights o Road Hierarchy o Drainage o Open Space and Planting Strategy o Phasing

40 o Urban Design Principles o Movement and Access o Character Areas o Exempt Infrastructure

• Retail Statement The Retail Statement considers the proposals in the context of the advice contained within PPS6. It assesses the potential trading consequences and benefits associated with the development of the new foodstore and ancillary retail units and examines whether there is a need for the proposed development in terms of quantitative and qualitative need. The report concludes that in line with guidance in PPS6, the site is exempt from the need for a sequential test as it forms part of a larger application to establish a new community and local retail centre.

• Leisure Tourism and Services Statement This statement demonstrates that the proposed development is in accordance with National policies and the Development Plan comprising Regional and Local Plan Policies and in particular in the context of the advice contained within PPS6. The statement concludes that the development will also meet the Government’s wider policy aims including promoting social inclusion, encouraging investment in deprived areas, creating additional employment opportunities and an improved physical environment and delivering sustainable development.

• Additional Supporting Statement Regarding the Green Belt Boundary The supporting statement sets out the historical background to the Green Belt boundary allocation and acknowledges that the proposed development encroaches into the Green Belt by 2.32 hectares. The statement concludes that any harm to the openness of the Green Belt by reason of inappropriate development will be mitigated by large surrounding Green Belt areas which will remain open and enhanced by the provision of Waverley Park.

• Outline Surface Water Drainage Strategy The report provides the proposed outline surface water network and demonstrates that it can accommodate the surface water run off from the proposed development along with the relevant adjacent development sites.

41 • Green Infrastructure Strategy (GIS) The GIS provides only a summary of Green Infrastructure provision, and refers to other supporting documents submitted with the planning application, such as the Design and Access Statement and the Environmental Impact Assessment. The Strategy demonstrates that the proposed development will enable links to be forged with the surrounding areas and will offer a range of functions from habitat creation, to recreational and amenity space, to food production and flood attenuation.

• Ecological Management Strategy The aim of this strategy is to guide the conservation, enhancement and management of biodiversity in the full range of habitats and species located within and adjacent to the site. The report demonstrates that appropriate assessments in line with UK legislation will be carried out to ensure biodiversity improvement, however these will be worked up in full as part of a 5 year management plan, which is a requirement of the previously approved restoration works and will also be a requirement of the new community proposals.

• Sustainability Appraisal Report The Sustainability Appraisal Report confirms that a number of aspects of sustainable design to which the development is already committed to through the planning application will be delivered. These include Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 minimum and a BREEAM Very Good rating for commercial buildings, provision of a flexible, progressive district CHP system from Phase 1b onwards, provision of high quality public transport links and incorporation of SUDS across the site to minimise surface water run off and the risk of flooding.

• Low Carbon Energy Statement including Renewables This statement demonstrates methods in which the development at Waverley will achieve a minimum standard of a 44% reduction in carbon emissions which is equal to Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 from day 1 of the development. It concludes by stating that due to the prolonged build programme forecast of 20 years Waverley could achieve an overall 90% carbon emission reduction, which if supplemented by allowable solutions in the form of suitable Low and Zero Carbon (LZC) technologies (PV and Wind) and further modest energy efficiency improvements defined at detail design stage could achieve 100% reduction in regulated carbon emissions.

• Statement of Community Involvement This statement demonstrates that Harworth Estates has undergone a widespread programme of community consultation over the last 6 years which has included pre application discussion with the Council and the community dating back to 2003. Community consultation has included presentation of the proposals to statutory consultees, local community groups, members of the general public and Council

42 officials. This was undertaken at pre application, post submission and following the submission of amended information. The statement concludes that comments received have related to technical matters which are addressed in the supporting documents submitted with the planning application; however in general, responses have been supportive of the proposed new community.

• The Community Management Scheme This report provides the recommended structure for the proposed management company, the proposed management arrangements and a number of frequently asked questions. It states that the management company is required as the Council is not in a position to accept by way of dedication or transfer unadopted public open spaces, woodland, reservoirs, lakes, common areas or urban drainage systems. It also states that the management company will be funded by means of a service charge imposed on all residents and / or occupiers of Waverley, charges for use of management company facilities, public funding, charitable events and private funding including a dowry from UK Coal and house builders.

• Environmental Impact Assessment Technical Appendices o Air Quality The assessment considers emissions from road traffic and combustion plant as part of the proposed development and concludes that following site specific assessments, levels of nitrogen dioxide are forecast to be above the Air Quality Objectives in some areas, whether or not the proposed development goes ahead. A negligible or slight adverse impact is therefore forecast to occur in these areas.

o Carbon Footprint This assessment demonstrates that upon completion of the proposed development, in approximately 2032, the incorporation of measures to reduce the CO² emissions associated with the development could potentially result in a 31% CO² saving against the baseline scenario and contribute towards the Government target of achieving an overall reduction in UK CO² emissions.

o Climate Change Adaptation This report identifies some of the changes in the regional climate and those features of the new community development at Waverley which have been integrated into the masterplan. The report concludes that the design team have taken initial steps to design a development which is adapted to meet some of the regional impact of climate change, such as increasing temperatures and minimising flood risk.

43 o Ecology The report confirms the presence of a number of mammals and birds on and adjacent to the site, however the recent land use and the ongoing restoration has limited the sites potential to support a wider range of species. As habitats develop within the footprint of the site then more species will colonise and other areas in the site will become ecologically viable and important. o Flood Risk The Flood Risk Assessment deals with probability and flood risk management measures in accordance with the guidance outlined in PPS25. The report identifies the site as mainly lying within Flood Zone 1 on the Environment Agency flood maps. There is an area of Flood Zone 2 located towards the centre of the site, along with a narrow strip of Flood Zone 3 located to the east of the site, along the River Rother and a small area in the vicinity of Highfield Lane. The Flood Zone 3 area close to Highfield Lane historically represented storage ponds, which have now been backfilled. The report concludes that in accordance with PPS25 the proposed development is compatible with the areas identified as being within a Flood Zone 1 designation. Areas identified as being within Flood Zone 2 or 3 are to be developed with acceptable water compatible development. o Landscape and Views This assessment considers the effects that the proposed development has on the landscape and visual environment and characteristic features. It concludes by stating the development is considered to have a minor adverse effect in the short to medium term principally during construction phases. However as the development reaches final completion the overall effects on the landscape and visual resource are deemed to be beneficial. o Noise and Vibration This Statement considers the proposals in the context of the advice contained within PPG24. It assesses the suitability of the site for residential use and the potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the construction and operation of a mixed use development, with respect to local noise and vibration sensitive receptors. The report concludes that the construction phase of the development, although temporary has the potential to cause disturbance, however suitable mitigation will be implemented to minimise any potential impacts. It goes on to demonstrate that changes in the traffic noise emissions on roads surrounding the development will be negligible as a result of the scheme traffic movements.

44 o Socio Economics This report describes the major socio-economic policy objectives and reviews the baseline conditions at the site and in the surrounding areas. It concludes that the key overriding theme in all local and regional policy are economic regeneration, revitalising housing markets and providing affordable housing, and sustainable development through providing access to employment, services, facilities, amenities and open space to all. The Waverley proposals will have a positive impact on the baseline environment of the area, and will contribute to the socio-economic objectives of local, regional and national policy.

o Soils, Geology and Contamination This report describes the current and baseline conditions at the site with regard to the soils and underlying geology having regard to PPG14. The report concludes that residual impacts to soils and geology and resulting from contamination should be very limited. All historic contamination has been removed and placed in a licensed containment facility. In the regional context the new community development is not significant and containment of the historic contamination has provided a benefit.

o Transport Assessment This Assessment acknowledges that the proposed development will have an impact on the surrounding highway network, however this will be mitigated against by the provision for improved public transport provision within and adjacent to the site, including use of the adjacent Park and Ride and other measures outlined in the Travel Plan. In addition, alterations and improvements to local highway junctions have been identified within the vicinity of the development.

o Waste This report states that the operational waste generated by this development will impact on the waste collection services offered by RMBC and the ability for RMBC to meet current and future legal targets for the diversion of waste from landfill. The aims outlined are to reduce landfill waste and increase household recycling. The consideration of these issues within the design of the new community development will provide an environment which facilitates household waste collections as well as providing some degree of future proofing to reflect potential changes in the household collection regime.

• Environmental Statement Main Report The EIA main report identifies the proposals as falling within Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 which includes urban development projects. The report then goes on to summarise the likely effects in relation to each topic as identified above.

45

• Environmental Statement Non Technical Summary This report summarises the key points identified in the EIA technical appendices and provides a succinct account of each topic area.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

RSS Policies

1. YH1 ‘Overall Approach and Key Spatial Strategies’ seeks to transform the economic, environmental and social conditions in the Regeneration Priority Areas which includes the older industrialised parts of South Yorkshire.

2. YH2 ‘Climate Change and Resource Use’ sets out a number of means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including increasing development in cities and towns; encouraging better energy, resource and water efficient buildings; minimising resource demands from development; redeveloping previously developed land; effective waste management; and increasing renewable energy, capacity and carbon capture.

3. YH4 ‘Regional Cities and Sub Regional Cities and Towns’ are identified as the prime focus for housing, employment, shopping, leisure, education, health and cultural activities and facilities in the region; they should be attractive places to live and work and accessibility by public transport and other modes of transport is important.

4. YH7 ‘Location of Development’ states that first priority should be for the re-use of previously developed land and buildings.

5. YH9 ‘Green Belts’ states that the Green belts in North, South and West Yorkshire have a valuable role in supporting urban renaissance, transformation and concentration, as well as conserving countryside, and their general extent ….. should not be changed.

6. SY1 ‘South Yorkshire Sub Area Policy’ states that most developments should be focused on Sheffield and the sub regional towns, including Rotherham.

7. ENV1 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ refers to reducing the causes of flooding to existing and future development.

8. ENV3 ‘Water Quality’ promotes a high standard of water quality in the region; prevents development that would cause pollution of water and promotes adequate sewerage infrastructure.

46 9. ENV5 ‘Energy’ will maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increases in renewable energy capacity through orientation and layout of development; maximising the use of combined heat and power; community heating opportunities supporting the use of clean coal technologies and abatement measures.

10. ENV8 ‘Biodiversity’ will safeguard and enhance biodiversity and geological heritage, and ensure that the natural environment functions as an integrated network of habitats.

11. ENV10 ‘Landscape’ seeks to safeguard and enhance landscapes that contribute to the distinctive character of Yorkshire and the Humber, including derelict and spoiled urban fringe landscapes in the former coalfield and older industrial parts of South Yorkshire.

12. ENV11 ‘Health, Recreation and Sport’ seeks to improve the health of residents by focusing, concentrating and supporting economic development in and around regional and sub regional cities and towns; providing and enhancing high quality facilities for sport and recreation and maximising opportunities to develop walking and cycling routes and other green infrastructure.

13. E1 ‘Creating a Successful and Competitive Regional Economy’ seeks to create a successful and competitive regional economy by encouraging economic growth particularly of the knowledge driven economy.

14. E3 ‘Land and Premises for Economic Development’ aims to locate economic development on previously developed land and current land allocations.

15. H1 ‘Provision and Distribution Housing’ refers to the need to improve and increase housing stock for all households wanting homes, taking account of strong economic growth in the Leeds City Region, regeneration and increasing economic growth in South Yorkshire.

16. H2 ‘Managing and Stepping up the Supply and Delivery of Housing’ supports the delivery of the required homes the Local Authority should prioritise on brownfield land and coordinate housing with provision of the necessary green social and physical infrastructure.

17. H4 ‘The Provision of Affordable Housing’ states that the Region needs to increase its provision of affordable housing and estimates this to be up to 30% in Rotherham.

18. H5 ‘Housing Mix’ seeks the provision of homes for a mix of households reflecting the needs of the area.

47

19. T1 ‘Personal Travel Reduction and Modal Shift’ aims to reduce travel demand, traffic growth and congestion, shift to modes with lower environmental impact, and improve journey time reliability.

20. T3 ‘Public Transport’ states that public transport infrastructure and services should be safeguarded and improved and development should make use of existing public transport services or provide a focus for viable new services. Services should be available as soon as development commences and priority will be given to the provisions for strategic bus based Park and Ride facilities.

Local Planning Policy in the UDP

The site is split between three allocations in the adopted UDP: “Industry and Business”, “White Land with a reference to Mineral Coal Extraction” and “Green Belt”.

1. HG4.3 ‘Windfall Sites’ states that proposals for housing development will be determined in light of their location within the existing built-up area.

2. HG5 ‘The Residential Environment’ states that the Council will encourage the use of best practice in housing layout and design in order to provide developments which enhance the quality of the residential environment.

3. EC3.3 ‘Other Development within Industrial and Business Areas’ sets out that other development will be accepted subject to no adverse effect on the character of the area or on residential amenity and that it can be demonstrated that there are no suitable alternative locations available for the proposed development.

4. ENV1 ‘Green Belt’ states that only development essential for the use of agriculture, forestry or open recreation will be allowed unless there are very special circumstances.

5. ENV1.4 ‘Land Adjacent to the Green Belt’ aims to ensure that development is sympathetic to the environmental quality and appearance of adjacent Green belt land.

6. ENV2 ‘Conserving the Environment’ looks to ensure that development takes into account the impact on wildlife and historic and geological resources.

7. ENV2.4 ‘Enhancing Environmental Resources’ the Council will support the positive promotion and enhancement of the Borough’s environmental resources.

48

8. ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’ recognises the vital importance of maintaining and enhancing the landscape of the Borough.

9. ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ aims to ensure that development should not be at the expense of the local environment and the character and appearance of the area. The Policy aims to achieve environmental improvements through an appropriate standard of design, layout and landscaping.

10. ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ seeks to minimise the impact of development on the environment and looks to protect it from, for example, pollution or flooding. It also states that development leading to a significant loss of trees will be permitted only where there is compelling justification for doing so.

11. ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ aims to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development.

12. ENV4.1 ‘Improvement Schemes’ supports and promotes initiatives which will enhance and improve the quality of the Borough’s built environment.

13. ENV4.3 ‘Unstable Land’ states that developments will need to demonstrate that any potential for ground instability has been investigated.

14. ENV4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’ requires the applicant to undertake contamination surveys and recommend measures to treat/remove any contamination identified, on land which may be contaminated by previous industrial uses.

15. T2 ‘Major Road Schemes and Highway Improvements’ promotes appropriate schemes on the Major Road Network and other main road schemes which improves access to the national motorway and trunk road network, reduce congestion and support the development of strategic regeneration areas.

16. T3 ‘Public Transport’ supports the development and improvement of facilities for users of public transport in both rural and urban areas.

17. T3.1 ‘Bus Priority Measures and New Systems’ makes provision, where appropriate for bus priority measures in addition to investigating scope for the development of new transport systems on key corridors within the Borough.

49 18. T4 ‘Traffic Management’ promotes comprehensive traffic management schemes.

19. T6 ‘Location and Layout of Development’ aims to locate development close to public transport, discourage development which causes traffic congestion and promote safe and convenient access for pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities, as well as ensuring highway safety for car and public transport users.

20. T7 ‘Public Rights of Way’ indicates that these will be safeguarded, maintained, promoted and created as appropriate.

21. RET1.1 ‘Shopping Environment’ indicates that the Council will sustain and enhance the vitality, viability and regeneration of defined town centres.

22. RET6 ‘Local Shopping Provision’ supports development proposals for convenience shopping facilities serving local communities.

23. CR1 ‘Community and Social Provision’ seeks to enable the provision and retention of a range of community and social facilities.

24. CR2.1 ‘Outdoor Playing Space Standards’ seeks to achieve and maintain the NPFA minimum standard for outdoor playing space of 2.4ha per 1,000 population, accessible to residential areas.

25. UTL1 ‘Safeguarding Utility Infrastructure’ states that ‘the Council, in consultation with the utility companies, will require that development proposals take into account any existing and new service infrastructure requirements, such as major pipelines, transmission lines, telecommunications networks, distribution mains, sewers, sewerage treatment works, land drainage systems, flood defences ….’

26. UTL2 ‘Utility Services for New Development’ seeks to control the use of development of land having had regard to the efficient provision of gas, water, drainage, electricity and telecommunication services to and within areas of future development.

27. UTL3 ‘Environmental Impact of Service Installations’ seeks to ensure that the utility companies and agencies avoid or minimise the adverse landscape and environmental impacts of transmission lines and installations.

28. UTL3.3 ‘Energy Conservation’ encourages new development proposals which promote and improve energy efficiency.

50

29. UTL3.4 ‘Renewable Energy’ favours proposals for the generation of power from renewable energy sources unless the proposed development would cause demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance.

Other Material Considerations

1. PPS1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ sets out the overarching planning policies on delivery of sustainable development through the planning system. Sustainable development is defined as the core principle underpinning planning and incorporates strong, vibrant and sustainable communities; protection and enhancement of the environment; prudent use of natural resources; and sustainable economic development.

2. Supplement to PPS1 ’Planning and Climate Change’ sets out how planning, in providing for the new homes, jobs and infrastructure needed by communities, should help shape places with lower carbon emissions and be resilient to the climate change now accepted as inevitable.

3. PPG2 ‘Green Belts’ states that the most important attribute of Green Belts are their openness and character. Paragraph 3.2 states that: - “Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt. It is for the applicant to show why permission should be granted. Very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not exist unless the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.“

4. PPS3 ‘Housing’ was updated in November 2006 and encourages the creation of mixed communities of a variety of housing in terms of tenure, price and households. A key objective is that Local Planning Authorities should continue to make effective use of land by re-using land that has been previously developed. When identifying previously developed land for housing development consideration has to be given to sustainability issues. Efficient use of land is also a key consideration and 30 dwellings per hectare net should be used as a national indicative minimum. Careful attention to design is fundamental to using land efficiently.

5. Planning Policy Statement 4: ‘Planning for Sustainable Economic Development’ was adopted on 29 December 2009 and sets out how planning bodies should, in the wider context of delivering sustainable development, positively plan for sustainable economic growth and respond to the challenges of the global economy, in their plan policies and planning decisions

51

6. PPS9 ‘Biodiversity and Geological Conservation’ aims, amongst other things, to protect and enhance biodiversity as part of the development proposals.

7. PPS10 ‘Planning for Sustainable Waste Management’ forms part of the National Waste Management Plan for the UK. The overall objective is to protect human health and the environment by producing less waste by using it as a resource wherever possible.

8. PPG13 ‘Transport’ aims to increase the use of modes of transport other than the car, increase accessibility to jobs and services and reduce road traffic in the interests of sustainability and the environment.

9. PPG14 ‘Development on Unstable Land’ advises Local Authorities, land owners and developers on development on land which is unstable or is potentially unstable. To ensure that development is suitable and any physical constraints on land are taken into account at all stages of planning.

10. PPG17 ‘Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation’ stresses the importance for sport and recreation and improving people’s quality of life and promotes the inclusion of high quality, well managed and maintained open spaces, sports and recreational facilities.

11. PPS22 ‘Renewable Energy’ sets out how by facilitating renewable energy developments, planning can contribute to the Government’s sustainable development strategy.

12. PPS23 ‘Planning and Pollution Control’ advises that any consideration of the quality of land, air or water and potential impacts arising from development, possibly leading to impacts on health, is capable of being a material planning consideration.

13. PPG24 ‘Planning and Noise’ provides guidance to Local Authorities on the use of planning powers to minimise the adverse impact of noise through location of development and mitigation of the impact of noise.

16. PPS25 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ aims to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and to direct development away from areas at highest risk.

17. Interim Planning Statement – Affordable Housing (June 2008) states that for planning applications for 15 or more houses or

52 sites of 0.5 hectares or more, no less than 25% of all dwellings shall be provided on site

18. DETR Circular 2/99 – Environment Impact Assessment which provides guidance on the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 for local planning authorities

19. ODPM Circular 05/05 – Planning Obligations provides guidance on the use of planning obligations in England under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as substituted by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991

20. DETR Circular 5/94 ‘Planning out Crime’ clearly states that crime prevention is a material consideration in the planning process. Providing facilities for young people to reduce crime and improve community safety are clearly issues that must be considered.

Publicity

The application, being an EIA development has been advertised as such and as a departure from the UDP and affecting a public right of way, by press notice (in the Sheffield Telegraph, Rotherham Advertiser and Dinnington Guardian), and by site notice.

In addition, four public meetings were held in November and December 2008 at Treeton Primary School, Woodhouse Mill Working Men’s Club, Handsworth Grange School and Catcliffe Primary School where local residents were invited to view the proposals and ask questions. These meetings were attended by Harworth Estates and their advisors who gave presentations on the proposals for the new community and the Highfield Commercial office development. RMBC Officers from Planning, Transportation, Drainage and Environmental Health were also in attendance to answer any technical questions posed by members of the public. Attendees were given the opportunity to complete a pro-forma prepared by RMBC and SCC which was prepared to enable the Local Authority to gain a view on public perception of the proposed development.

In response to this round of publicity, a total of 303 objections were received (in the form of individual letters and the aforementioned pro-forma) from local residents raising the following issues:

• Lack of information • Scale and viability of the development • Density of development • Surface water drainage system and flooding issues particularly relating to the community of Catcliffe • Sewage and foul drainage system concerns • Waste management

53 • Air quality • Public transport provisions to and from surrounding communities • Lack of parking provision proposed • Affordable housing • Housing sustainability • Secondary school provision • Highways networks and road capacity • Increase of traffic in the surrounding communities • Greater code for sustainable homes level should be achieved • Loss of Green Belt land • Destroy existing Parishes of Woodhouse Mill and Orgreave • The development will put additional strain on existing services in the area such as health, social, police, highways and education • Negative impact on local wildlife and habitats

1 letter of support has been received from a local resident outlining the following:

• The proposals appear to be well thought out • Support the large green areas and the lakes • It is hoped that the phasing of the residential areas is adhered to (200 dwellings per annum) to avoid disruption to surrounding areas • Phasing would also allow for subtle changes in architecture.

Clive Betts MP for Sheffield Attercliffe wrote in prior to the submission of the application in April 2007 and has submitted 2 subsequent letters objecting that:

‘In the current circumstances I do not believe that residential development should take place until it is absolutely clear that the nearby housing market renewal areas have improved sufficiently so that new housing at Waverley would not adversely affect the sustainability of the housing market. …… Of even greater concern to me is the potential impact at peak periods of traffic from Waverley on the already congested roads in Handsworth and Darnall.’

Following amendments to the proposals, the application was re-advertised on 30 th October in the local press as above and by site notice. A drop in session was also held on 23 rd November 2009 at the ITC Centre in the AMP. As a result of this publicity 3 letters of objection have been received including one from Councillor Mick Rooney, Councillor for Woodhouse Ward, on the grounds that:

• Without a properly funded, thought out plan for both public and private transport, the scheme will cause greater congestion on already busy roads, further damaging air quality in the area; • Local communities cannot see any benefit to themselves in this development and will be vastly disadvantaged by the increase in traffic movements;

54 • This is not the correct location for additional housing as there is no infrastructure in place to facilitate it; • The loss of the playing fields from the Coalbrook Estate is unacceptable.

1 letter withdrawing a previous objection has also been received.

Consultations

External Consultees

Sheffield City Council have written a report to their City Centre South and East Planning and Highways Area Board. Officers have reported that they have no objections to the development in principle and recognise Rotherham’s need to deliver housing to meet RSS targets. The impact of the development on the local highway network and Junctions 33 and 34 of the M1 has undergone scrutiny and the mitigation proposed is considered to be adequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the proposed development. As a result of the development a number of Sheffield secondary school pupils who are currently educated in Rotherham will be displaced, therefore a financial contribution is requested towards the provision of a new school in the Lower Don Valley. Air quality has also been assessed and measures to reduce vehicle movements to and from Handsworth are suggested. In relation to drainage, there are concerns that focus has been given to traditional methods of pond storage and releasing water at an agreed rate rather than adopting a more modern approach which provides watercourses that present amenity and biodiversity benefits.

Doncaster Council did not comment on the revised information but responded on the original information stating that the scale and proximity of the site to Doncaster should not adversely impact on the Doncaster housing market. Unless the proposals can be justified as an extension to the Sheffield urban extension area primarily, rather than as a settlement in Rotherham, approval of the scheme could set a potential precedent for accommodating housing in a way that does not support the RSS strategy.

Orgreave Parish Council only made comments on the original documents submitted in August 2008 and stated that they would like to be considered for a financial contribution from the developer. Later correspondence from them relate to the proposed link road which does not form part of this application.

Darnall Community Forum only commented on the original documents submitted in August 2008, stating that they are concerned about educational provision by putting increasing pressure on existing places in both Sheffield and Rotherham. The whole project should also be dependant upon the provision of a sustainable plan for traffic management and public transport provision.

Handsworth Community, Darnall and Tinsley Forum raise concerns regarding the Air Quality and the impact the development will have on an already poor

55 air quality area. Concerns are also raised that no modelling has been undertaken as part of these proposals in Handsworth or Darnall where there is a large projected increase in traffic movements. It is therefore crucial that mitigation measures are put in place to achieve European Limit Values by 2015 and the proposed development should contribute towards this.

The Coal Authority acknowledges that whilst mineshafts in the opencast area of the development site have been removed to the base of the opencast, underground workings may still exist outside of the opencast areas and the treatment of these is required for mitigation purposes prior to any development. Furthermore potential risks have been identified relating to ground gases associated with opencast backfill. These risks require mitigation through the inclusion of gas protection measures which could be controlled through conditions.

SYMAS acknowledge that the shafts have been partially removed and covered by a substantial amount of opencast backfill. It is therefore unclear whether development above the shafts would be deemed acceptable by the NHBC. SYMAS therefore recommend consulting the Coal Authority and the imposition of a condition.

British Waterways states that the proposals do not lie within the consultation zone (150m either side of the centre line) of any waterway, reservoir, canal, feeder channel, water course or culvert owned or managed by British Waterways and therefore have no comments to make.

South Yorkshire Police indicate that the design and access statement offers the prospect of good general site security principles and would welcome the opportunity to work with the developer in the future to provide detailed security advice on issues such as parking, lighting and planting.

Sheffield and Rotherham Wildlife Trust only made comments on the original documents submitted in August 2008 by stating that PPS9 should be taken fully into account when assessing the proposals. Importance needs to be placed on Green Infrastructure within the development footprint and made clear in the plans. Football pitches should not be provided in an area previously agreed as nature conservation habitat / wildflower grassland. Further information is required regarding the safeguarding of ground nesting birds.

Yorkshire Wildlife Trust only commented on the original information submitted in August 2008. Their comments related mainly to the wildlife corridor along the River Rother in that this should be managed appropriately to mitigate against any adverse impacts on habitat and species such as water voles and otters. The SUDS systems should be designed to enhance biodiversity and a long term plan should be put in place to maintain the wildlife interest of the site.

56 Natural England have commented on sustainability, transport, ecology and public access and enjoyment. In each case they are pleased to see that their previous comments have been considered in the revised information and do not raise any significant concerns other than the fact that all dwellings should meet minimum Code for Sustainable Homes Level 6 and further consideration should be given to the integration of rain water harvesting and grey water recycling.

Rotherham and District Ornithological Society did not comment on the revised information but responded on the original information stating that the football pitches should not be located in an area of nature conservation habitat / wildflower grassland, defined access and footpaths should be located to direct access away from ecologically sensitive areas and a countryside ranger should be employed to work with the local schools and the community as well as oversee the overall management of the site.

Rotherham Biodiversity Forum made comments on the original set of information and raised a number of questions. The most pertinent of which relates to the management of the nature conservation area in the long term, the need to carefully consider the housing along the River Rother to ensure that no negative impact occurs and what will happen to the areas that will not be developed in the early stages of development i.e. will a site habitat management plan be prepared?

RSPB do not wish to make any comments on the proposals.

Buglife Invertebrate Conservation Trust wish to object to the original set of information submitted in August 2008, they have not commented on the revised information. Their objection is based on the grounds that inadequate invertebrate studies have been undertaken as part of the EIA.

Rotherham Naturalist’s Society have only made comments on the original set of information submitted in August 2008. They state that their main concern relates to the high population density inbuilt into the plan and lack of open spaces and car parking areas for the inhabitants. The management and maintenance of the landscaped areas will be of paramount importance for years to come if the site is not to deteriorate.

South Yorkshire Passenger Executive have only commented on the original set of information; however Officers have been working closely with SYPTE to ensure all of their following comments have been addressed. Their original comments related to the need to provide a public transport interchange facility, a contribution towards achieving Bus Rapid Transit or alternative public transport provision, Real-time information provision, public transport season tickets and secondary school travel. A site wide Travel Plan is also required.

Highways Agency have been attending monthly transport workstream meetings to discuss the impact of the development on the local road network and Junctions 33 and 34 of the M1. The Highways Agency do not raise any

57 fundamental or in principle objections to the development, and are confident that outstanding issues related to the impacts on local and motorway junctions can be addressed through physical mitigation and management of traffic impacts which will be secured through conditions, the S106 agreement and S278 agreements as appropriate. The Highways Agency have indicated that they intend to continue working with RMBC and the developer to resolve the outstanding issues.

Environment Agency raise no objections subject to conditions relating to flood risk, biodiversity and groundwater and contaminated land.

Yorkshire Water raise concerns regarding the discharge of surface water from the public sewer direct to the reservoir. It is unlikely that YW would adopt a sewer that discharged directly to the reservoir as that would involve YW becoming involved with the operation and management of the reservoir in order to ensure the proper operation of sewer outfalls.

The National Grid indicate that future development on the site may adversely impact the safety and integrity of their apparatus and therefore request that prior to commencement of any development on site, developers contact the National Grid with full details.

British Oxygen Company (BOC) confirm they have no services in the area and do not wish to comment.

Network Rail do not wish to make any observations.

Yorkshire and Humber Assembly support the application in principle and consider that the range of proposed uses are appropriate. The scale of the proposed development is also considered to be acceptable subject to the imposition of a condition restricting car parking numbers in accordance with RSS policy T2 and maximising the use of proposed and potential public transport opportunities in line with RSS Policy T1.

Yorkshire Forward have made comments on Sustainability, Housing, and Transport and generally welcome the proposals, however have expressed concern that if the proposals re-direct the only bus route currently running through the AMP, this would have a detrimental effect on traffic flows in this area by reason of encouraging additional car usage.

Transform South Yorkshire attended both CABE Design Panel Reviews and have stated that whilst there are a number of ‘strategic design weaknesses’, they are all capable of resolution. Their main concerns however relate to the location of the proposed Park and Ride which they feel is at odds with the creation of Waverley as a place, they also feel that insufficient attention has been given to the character of the network routes and places, which should be explored further in the future design codes and the fact that they consider that the lakeside development should come forward earlier in the development phasing. Support is given to the establishment of a management company.

58 Sport England originally objected to the proposals on the basis that the development has failed to adequately address the impact on existing sport and recreation facilities, nor did it identify the need for new sport and recreation facilities. Following the submission of the revised information they have withdrawn their objection but state that the applicant needs to be aware of the need to have adequate trigger mechanisms within each phase of development to ensure the provision of sport and recreation facilities. New and upgraded facilities should meet Sport England design guidance and ground condition surveys should be carried out as a matter of urgency.

South Yorkshire Archaeology do not wish to make any comments due to the history of the site.

Transport, Health & Residents Against Pollution raised concerns regarding heavy vehicles entering the site and the amount of extra traffic created by the new development on the motorway and other link roads. This response was based on the original information submitted in August 2008. No further comments have been received following the submission of the revised information.

WM Morrison Supermarket raise objections to the proposals on the grounds that the existing shopping centre, which includes the Morrison’s store at Catcliffe, should be given the allocation as a District Centre to serve the new community at Waverley and the wider area. The main focus for future retail development should therefore be at this existing shopping centre and not within the new development.

Barnsley & Rotherham Chamber of Commerce wishes to offer their support as it will make a significant contribution to Rotherham’s economic development through the delivery of the major mixed use development incorporating and complementing existing strategies across the City Region.

Internal Consultees

Tourism and Leisure Service commented on the proposals for a hotel within the development and advised that provided it is not constructed within the next 5 years they raise no objections as this will not affect the two hotels already planned for the town centre.

Neighbourhood Services – Air Quality states that air quality at the development site is predicted to meet the Government’s health based objectives for nitrogen dioxide annual mean. However a ‘very substantial adverse impact’ could occur in the immediate vicinity of the Northern Energy Centre ‘unless measures are implemented in the design to ensure that no adverse impact occurs in practice’. Conditions to ensure that continued monitoring and the use of CHP plants are suggested to prevent unacceptable levels of air pollution.

Neighbourhood Services – Contamination raise no objections subject to conditions relating to further site investigation work.

59

Public Rights of Way Officer states that the perimeter bridleway is mostly open and other routes proposed as part of the restoration proposals are progressing well.

Off Road Motorbike Prevention Officer states that suitable access barriers and fencing should be installed on the end of path links which lead to open spaces to prevent nuisance from off road motor vehicles.

Green Spaces indicates that based on the information on Open Space and Recreation in the revised Design and Access Statement, the type and quantity of amenity space relating to recreational need is considered to be adequate.

Children and Adult Services - Early Years Sufficiency Officer only commented on the original set of information and confirmed that accommodation will be required in the 2 new proposed schools to deliver extended services and a community building should be provided as part of the proposals.

Neighbourhood (Housing) raise concerns that the development will have a detrimental impact on Housing Market Renewal Areas (HMR) and suggest conditions relating to the controlled release of sites to be no more than 200 per annum unless the applicant can justify by reference to market conditions and impact on renewal areas.

Affordable Housing Officer states that the level of affordable housing and tenure split should be in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the Interim Planning Statement unless economic viability dictates otherwise.

Streetpride – Landscape raises concerns that the revised ‘Design and Access Statement’ fails to set out the importance of street trees and the planning needed for this to be successful. A heavy undue reliance on the resolution of greening issues at the reserved matters stage is considered to be unviable in this instance. The ‘Ecological Management Strategy’ provides recommendations for woodland and scrub management but more a detailed schedule is required for submissions of planting schemes in support of the development. The ‘Green Infrastructure Strategy’ should set out a guiding Vision and link with other strategies such as the Biodiversity and Local Transport Plan.

Library and Information Services have demonstrated a need for a library facility within the new community.

Streetpride - Drainage do not raise any significant concerns regarding flood risk, surface water and foul drainage subject to conditions.

Streetpride - Highway Structures confirmed that there are no existing highway structures affected by the proposals. New adopted structures and culverts will be assessed as part of the detailed design stage.

60 Streetpride - Waste Management have commented on the original waste strategy report submitted in August 2008. Comments relate to the need to incorporate a designated area for residual waste and recyclables and somewhere to enable residents to carry put home composting. Natural food waste processing units should be provided for residents to use and the processing of residual waste could possibly be processed through the CHP plant, by some alternative technology.

Streetpride - Ecology the content, impact assessment and results of the ‘Ecological Impact Assessment’ is acceptable subject to ongoing monitoring of the site and management plan which will enable establishment of actual species, proving useful when considering the impact of future development areas. The ‘Biodiversity Action Plan’ is considered to be acceptable acknowledging that this is an outline application and will be subject to further development and detail.

Appraisal Where an application is made to a local planning authority for planning permission…..in dealing with such an application the authority shall have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, and to any other material considerations - S.70 (2) TCPA 1990.

Clearly this is a significant proposal and the planning position is complex. The potential benefits of the scheme need to be weighed against the relevant planning policies, national planning guidance and the Regional Spatial Strategy and where the development does not conform with the provision of the development plan, consideration needs to be given to other material considerations as set out in Section 38 (6) of the PCPA.

The issues to be addressed in this case are:

• Principle of development – residential, retail and leisure including green belt and education provision • Access to Facilities and Services • Highways and Transportation Issues • Drainage and Flood Risk • Urban Design • Open Space and Recreation • Green infrastructure, Ecology and Management • Geo-technical Constraints and contamination • Noise and Disturbance • Air Quality • Renewable Energy and Sustainability • Establishment of a Management Company • Parish Council Boundary Review • Draft Heads of Terms

Principle of Development

61 The site is split into three allocations in the adopted UDP; Industry and Business, White Land and Green Belt. The application to create a new sustainable community is therefore a departure to the Rotherham Unitary Development Plan, and is not included as a strategic site within the Regional Spatial Strategy.

When determining planning applications regard must be given to Section 38(6) of the PCPA 2004. This statutory requirement gives great importance to the Development Plan in planning decisions but it also indicates that local planning authorities (LPA’s) can grant planning permissions contrary to the provisions of the development plan so long as there are material planning reasons for doing so.

Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council has taken the view that this site is previously developed land due to its historical land use, and as such proposes it to be developed as an Urban Extension to Rotherham Urban Area in its Core Strategy Revised Options.

The site, as allocated in the Rotherham UDP (adopted 1999) has a boundary showing the minerals activity being undertaken on the site during the UDP plan period (1999-2001). Within the land shown as white on the UDP Proposals Map No.2, there are two letters M/C, and reference to the accompanying index identifies that the site is ‘allocated for surface mineral working throughout the life of the UDP’. This is the UDP land use allocation for the white land (approx 56 hectares).

The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 provides for the saving of polices in adopted or approved Unitary Development Plans for three years. On 28 September 2007 the Secretary of State saved the policies listed in the direction (that now accompanies the Rotherham UDP), and their corresponding allocations on the Proposals Map. The final restoration scheme associated with the original application to undertake open cast coaling operations and restoration (RB1993/1058) and all subsequent planning permission granted for this site, has not yet been completed and is not expected to be until 31 December 2010. It is therefore considered that the UDP Allocation identified above "surface mineral working M/C" is still valid.

It is clear that the proposal to develop a new sustainable community at the former Orgreave open cast site is a Departure to the adopted UDP and it has been advertised as such. The planning application and the Council’s decision will also be referred to GOYH. However to provide a clear understanding of where the proposals to develop a sustainable new community at Waverley have come from, it is essential to re-consider planning permission R93/1058P: the extraction of coal by open cast methods and the subsequent restoration of land off Orgreave Road, Highfield Lane Orgreave. Contained within Section 4 of the Report Synopsis presented to Planning Board, it outlines the main elements of the proposal as being ‘The extension of the existing opencast coal operations in a southwards direction through: - (iii) the site of the former Orgreave Colliery and colliery tips. There would be progressive backfilling

62 and restoration suitable for a mixture of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ after uses, together with water areas.”

The Report further notes that “The future land uses envisaged (which would involve a separate planning application at a later stage) include industrial / commercial; possibly some residential development and significant areas of landscaped open spaces with recreational potential.”

It is clear from the subsequent appraisal (section 10 of the Synopsis Report to Planning Board) that opencast coaling “would appear to represent the only effective means of restoring this large tract of heavily despoiled land to a beneficial afteruse, within a reasonable timescale and at no direct cost to the public purse.”

Planning Permission was granted for the extension of the existing opencast coal operations on the 21 st December 1994 and consideration of the conditions, in particular, condition 2 is relevant to this current planning application. This Condition states that: “No later than the end of the 9 year period referred to [at condition 1 above], coaling and reclamation works shall have ceased and the site shall have been restored, treated and brought to a state suitable for built development (subject to an agreed settlement period) forestry and amenity open space purposes (including incidental water areas and wetlands) – in accordance with the conditions set out below, and as depicted on the approved restoration plan (drawing ref 05.12924’).

Subsequent to this, a planning application for ‘Continuation of opencast coal and reclamation operations without compliance with condition 2 (time limit for completion) of planning permission R93/1058P dated 21/12/94 together with revisions to approved restoration contours at land at Orgreave Road / Highfield Lane, Orgreave’ was submitted (RB2003/1640). This planning permission approved a revised restoration scheme depicted on the restoration concept plan (drawing ref. 73/DO4A) dated 9 th September 2003. The report to Planning Board reported that “Permission is also sought for amendments to the originally approved restoration contours to enable the final reinstated land form to accommodate future potential comprehensive development aspirations for the land should these be realised through the formal Unitary Development Plan Review and Masterplan exercise already underway’.

When considering this 1993 application, it was acknowledged that the restoration of the minerals working site must be free standing and capable of restoration in its own right and a landform was therefore designed which was capable of anticipating all future options for the reclaimed site.

When this application was considered at Planning Board, the report referred to the masterplanning exercise already underway and in a separate report to Economic and Development Services (EDS) Cabinet Member 10th December 2003 the results of the Waverley Masterplan public consultation response were presented. The report to Cabinet Member makes clear that UK Coal were proposing a new mixed use community to be developed in Rotherham over a twenty year period. The Waverley Masterplan 2003 proposed

63 commercial, employment (180,000 sq metres) residential (3,700 dwellings), community facilities and soft after-uses.

The report to EDS Cabinet Member made clear that prior to the submission of the planning application to undertake the open cast coaling and reclamation scheme on the former Orgreave site the former British Coal Open Cast executive commissioned consultants Llewelyn Davies to draw up an illustrative masterplan for the whole site. This masterplan showed a mixed use final application including significant residential development around a planned dual purpose lake, with linking transportation and amenity corridors tying in with employment zones to the north and west. It was made available at a series of public meetings throughout the borough at this time. A formal presentation was made to Members on 21 November 1991 by British Coal Opencast Executive on the open casting scheme and potential future land uses proposed by the masterplan. The Llewelyn Davies masterplan was included within the Environmental Impact Assessment that accompanied the planning application granted for opencast, decontamination and restoration purposes in 1994.

The report goes on to state that the decision by British Coal Opencast Executive to undertake decontamination, coal extraction and subsequent restoration was only undertaken on the understanding that hard development on land outside of the Green Belt would be permitted. The scale of contamination was a major issue in terms of viability of the opencast scheme. Without the belief that future hard development on the site would be considered, British Coal Opencast Executive would not have proposed to undertake the decontamination of the site.

The most significant recommendation that Cabinet Member agreed is reiterated below:

• “That Cabinet Member agrees the opportunity to provide a mixed use community on this site be taken forward and considered within the Unitary Development Plan Review in the context of the Borough’s overall housing needs, the phasing of any proposed residential development, the requirements of South Yorkshire Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder and the guidance in Planning Policy Guidance note 3.”

Further, the recommendations propose “That officers continue discussions with UK Coal and their consultants on developing the masterplan.”

Further pre-application discussions were held with the Local Planning Authority prior to the submission of this current application and whilst every effort was made by the Council to encourage Harworth Estates to pursue a new community at Waverley through the Local Development Framework, ultimately the Council could not prevent the planning application being submitted by Harworth Estates. Planning Policy Statement 3 makes clear in paragraph 72 that “Local Planning Authorities should not refuse applications solely on the grounds of prematurity”. This is further substantiated by the

64 fact that the site has been identified as an Urban Extension to the Rotherham Urban Area in the Council’s Core Strategy Revised Options draft, which was published for consultation purposes in May 2009.

It is therefore clear from the above chronological order of events on this site that some form of development would be acceptable on this site from as far back as 1991. The land was allocated as White Land in the UDP as it was not expected to be available within the plan period, and it was unclear exactly what uses would be appropriate, therefore it was left as white land with a minerals allocation. Furthermore the site is proposed to be developed as an Urban Extension to Rotherham Urban Area in the Core Strategy Revised Options draft published for consultation purposes in May 2009.

Employment Land Issues As stated above, the site is also allocated for Industry and Business in the UDP. The proposals to create a new community will result in the loss of approximately 42 hectares of Employment Land.

The applicant’s planning statement makes no reference to the loss of this land, nor does it provide any analysis of the implications for the borough's employment land strategy or justification in terms of viability of sites for employment use in the future.

Despite this, these 42 hectares of employment land immediately to the east of the proposed Helical Governetz site are not part of the UDP Strategic Employment Area and are not included within the Borough’s employment land supply Allocations. This part of the site has been reclaimed as part of the open cast coaling operation. The employment notation denoted earlier activities on the site and at the time of UDP preparation (early nineties) there was an aspiration to see employment activities re-instated on the former Orgreave opencast site. The employment notation followed the boundary of Highfield Lane that has subsequently been removed as part of the minerals workings and no longer forms a legible boundary on the ground.

Planning permission has previously been granted for the Highfield Commercial proposals (and planning permission is currently being sought for Helical Governetz). At the time of submission, the applicant claimed that the proposals at Highfield Commercial will most likely provide 3,000 jobs in a mix of employment activities and if Helical Governetz is developed this will provide 4,900 jobs in a mix of commercial and employment activities, thereby retaining part of the employment land allocation for this purpose.

The remaining 42 hectares as referred to above will be lost to the development of the Waverley new community, however information supplied by the applicant suggests that this development will support a further 482 jobs in a mix of leisure, retail and commercial activities, in addition to an average requirement of 55 construction workers on site per year over the 20 year build period.

65

This information has been provided by the applicant as part of their Socio Economics Study and is split between the following use classes:

Land Use Gross floor Employment Jobs Area Density Small Businesses & Live 508 19 26 Wok Units Food Store 1300 19 68 Pub/Restaurant 2050 13 157 Café 750 10 75 Dry Cleaners 100 20 5 Chemist 150 20 7 Newsagents 100 20 5 Post Office 150 20 7 Health Centre 1300 70 18 Community Centre 400 90 4 Gym 2475 55 45 Sports Shop 100 20 5 Hotel 120 rooms 1 worker: 2 rooms 60

Total Gross 482 Jobs

The table above shows that the majority of jobs on the site will be created in the service sector. English Partnerships’ Additionality Guide states that the amount of jobs that “leak” out of an area depends on the type of job, with managerial and professional jobs experiencing the highest levels of leakage. It is therefore considered that due to only a small percentage of the jobs created as part of the new community (notwithstanding the proposals at Helical Governetz) proposals being professional jobs, the majority of jobs will be sourced from the local area.

The Sheffield Rotherham Economic Study 2007 (SRES) identifies that the majority of people who live in Sheffield and work in Rotherham live close to the Sheffield / Rotherham border. It is therefore considered that a high percentage of jobs generated on the site may be sourced from residents who do not live a great distance away from the proposals site.

It is therefore considered that the loss of this employment land in order to create a new community will not necessarily result in the loss of jobs. In contrast the creation of the jobs outlined above, in addition to the housing opportunities to enable the creation of a sustainable community are considered to outweigh the employment allocation which was based on historical activities on the site at the time of UDP preparation (early nineties). Furthermore the site does not form part of the UDP Strategic Employment Area and is not included within the Borough’s employment land supply

66 Allocations. The loss of this area is therefore not considered to be detrimental to the Borough’s employment land supply.

In terms of the site’s value as a Strategic Employment site, part of the site, along the railway towards the southwest is allocated as E35, which is an extension of the existing AMP site. The loss of this site to residential will reduce the amount of employment land that is currently allocated for employment development and could potentially result in land to be identified within the Green Belt for employment purposes. However from the recent consultation into the Core Strategy Revised Options May 2009, RMBC will need to review its Green Belt to achieve the housing land target required in the current Regional Spatial Strategy, therefore a balance has to be made.

This site, which extends to approximately 4 ha is heavily constrained by the existence of overhead power lines, the track alongside the railway and its linear form, all of which could make the site unattractive to potential occupiers and investors of the Advanced Manufacturing Park as the size of units are generally larger than average. Servicing of any employment units, access to them and a high quality-landscaping belt would also limit the development potential of this land for employment purposes. Furthermore, this area of land has never been included within any of the outline applications for the Advanced Manufacturing Park, thereby suggesting that the site is not attractive for the use of B1 and B2 land uses.

Housing Need PPS 3 requires that, when planning for housing growth, Local Planning Authorities identify enough land to provide for 15 years worth of supply, the number of houses required over that period is set out in the Regional Spatial Strategy. At any given time the Local Planning Authority must also identify enough “deliverable” land to meet needs for the next five years Housing requirement (known as the five year supply). In order to be “deliverable” a site must be available, suitable and achievable.

At the time that Rotherham’s Core Strategy Revised Options was produced, the remaining requirement, as set out in the Yorkshire and Humber Plan and taking into account previous performance, was 22,285 net additional dwellings. This means that for the remainder of the plan period an average of 1,238 dwellings per year will have to be built for the remainder of the plan period. In addition South Yorkshire was awarded New Growth Point status in July 2008, which increased the housing numbers for South Yorkshire by 20% above the Regional Spatial Strategy target for the period between 2008/9 and 2016/17. For Rotherham this means an additional 2,197 homes will be needed.

The Rotherham element of the Sheffield and Rotherham Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) was finalised in April 2009, giving a 5 year land supply of 4837; below the 6,190 dwellings needed to give a five year supply. The SHLAA only took into account remaining UDP allocations and planning permissions. The next version, currently being produced, will also take into account emerging potential LDF sites. This replacement SHLAA

67 may demonstrate a five year supply of suitable land, but current market conditions are affecting the economic viability of many sites. This will affect the “achievability” aspect of whether sites are “deliverable”, if sites are not deliverable at the time of the assessment, they cannot be included in the five year supply.

The Core Strategy Revised Options identified potential sites for an estimated 33,965 houses, these were categorised in terms of the reservations held with regard to each site; from “no reservations” to “major reservations”. Enough land for 3,900 houses placed in the “no reservations” category, a further 8,133 houses were placed in the “minor reservations” category, including the 3,890 houses proposed at Waverley. The remaining land, enough for 21,932 houses, was placed in the “major reservations” category.

Many of the sites in the “major reservations” category are green field and lie in the Green Belt, sites in the Green Belt always being categorised as “major reservations”.

Option 1 of the Core Strategy Revised Options includes all potential sites identified within the urban areas including the Waverly site. This option meets the RSS requirement but doesn’t quite accommodate the additional Growth Point figures. It represents the best estimate we have of the amount of Green Belt land that will need to be released to meet the requirement and gives us a figure of 408 Hectares.

It is clear then that with the inclusion of Waverley a substantial area of Green Belt land will be required to meet the RSS target. If Waverley is not released for housing the significant number of houses it would have provided will have to be accommodated on Green Belt and green field land. The release of Waverley for housing development would make a substantial contribution to the 15 year requirement and also the 5 year supply of deliverable land utilising a brownfield site.

Density The Design and Access Statement states that a maximum of 3,890 dwellings are planned for the site, with the density ranging from 35 dwellings per hectare (dph) to 75 dph, with densities of 90 dph at key locations such as the Waterfront. The average net density for the site therefore equates to 55 dph. High development densities are proposed to promote the efficient use of bronwfield land in accordance with PPS3. The densities proposed are considered to provide a sufficient population to support essential shops and other amenities.

The lowest densities of 35 dph are proposed to be located at the development fringes and around open spaces. The highest densities are located around the local centres and the Waterfront with the medium densities of 55 dph creating the gradient from the highest densities of the central areas, to the low densities of the periphery. The form of housing will vary across the site to provide a range of sizes and tenures, encouraging a mixed and sustainable community.

68

Paragraph 46 of PPS3 requires that Local Planning Authorities should develop housing density policies having regard to several factors including the level of housing need and the availability of suitable land, current and future infrastructure capacity, the desirability of using land efficiently (with reference to CO2 reduction), accessibility, the characteristics of the area and the desirability of achieving high quality, well-designed housing having regard to the considerations in paragraph 16 (design quality).

Paragraph 47 goes on to state that, reflecting paragraph 46, Local Planning Authorities may wish to set out a range of densities across the plan area rather than one broad density range although 30 dwellings per hectare (dph) net should be used as a national indicative minimum to guide policy development and decision-making, until local density policies are in place.

PPS3 also states that the density of existing development should not dictate that of new housing by stifling change or requiring replication of existing style or form. If done well, imaginative design and layout of new development can lead to a more efficient use of land without compromising the quality of the local environment (Paragraph 50)

The proposed average net density of 55 dwellings per hectare is well above the minimum required, in the absence of a local plan policy, by PPS3. This density allows for a mixture of high medium and low density appropriate to development of this scale. The location of higher densities in the central areas will contribute to the sustainability of services in the centre of the new community and the critical mass population that the development will create is considered to be adequate to support the facilities, services and amenities proposed as part of the community.

Housing Mix One of the Government’s key housing policy goals is to create sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities. One of the specific outcomes that PPS3 states should be delivered by the planning system is: “A mix of housing, both market and affordable, particularly in terms of tenure and price, to support a wide variety of households in all areas, both urban and rural.”

PPS3 requires that Local Development Documents should set out the mix of housing required, based upon the findings of the Strategic Housing Market Assessment and other local evidence. PPS3 also requires that, in planning at site level, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that the proposed mix of housing on large strategic sites reflects the proportions of households that require market or affordable housing and achieves a mix of households as well as a mix of tenure and price.

Rotherham’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) was completed in September 2007. In addition to assessing the need for affordable housing, the SHMA detailed the composition of existing households and expressed future need for particular house types as surpluses or deficits for particular dwelling sizes (by number of bedrooms). The SHMA states that Rotherham

69 has a surplus of three bedroom properties and a deficit of one, two and four+ bedroom houses, with the greatest deficit existing for two bedroom properties. The SHMA does however go on to say that this does not mean that the building of three bedroom properties should necessarily be restricted, as new three bedroom properties are needed to broaden the choice throughout the Borough.

This application does not give details of the mix of house types to be provided, apart from stating that the development will not include in excess of 20% apartments (778). RMBC do not have a policy dealing with housing mix at this time. The current SHMAA does not provide a clear picture of the proportion of various house types that will be needed for the numbers that we now know will need to be provided for in the LDF. It would therefore be impossible to assess the housing mix at this point, however subsequent detailed applications must ensure that the housing mix complies with the policies that will be in place based on future versions of the SHMA.

Pathfinder Issues The HMR Pathfinder area remains the predominant area of market weakness in the sub region and will therefore continue as highest priority area for investment. There are 10 Area Development Framework’s in the Pathfinder area; five in Rotherham, three in Sheffield and one each in Barnsley and Doncaster. The Sheffield East Area borders the northwestern edge of the Waverley site i.e. Waverley AMP, to the opposite side of the parkway.

The Waverley site, although bordering a HMR, does not form part of one, where there is an existing residential development in need of regeneration, and is therefore not technically a priority. The key issue therefore is whether the development in this location would prejudice or delay the objectives of the HMR areas.

Initial comments from SCC raised concerns that there is a risk that the proposals could undermine the HMR objectives, however the applicant has provided significant information relating to why they do not believe this to be the case. In the first instance they state that the NDF for Sheffield recognises that it is difficult to target more aspirational market segments in Attercliffe, Darnall and Tinsley due to poor perception and environment and lack of quality schools and other social infrastructure. Waverley is therefore considered to be better placed to provide such housing, alongside significant infrastructure provision which will raise the profile of the general area and reinforce the impact of the adjacent HMR programme.

Furthermore the phased development of the site, at approximately 200 dwellings per annum (in a buoyant market) and level of infrastructure works required to facilitate the development suggests that the first occupation on site will not be until at least 2012 and the development completed by 2032 at the earliest. It could also be argued that the development could make a significant contribution to the aims of the Sustainable Housing Market Strategy (SHMS), which incorporates the HMR Strategy for the next ten years. This could be achieved through promotion of demand for labour in the

70 area by enhancing the existing Waverley AMP employment area, providing aspirational housing, helping to increase the area’s housing range and the provision of better transport connections.

Given these factors there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the proposals at Waverley would be detrimental to the aims and objectives of the HMR areas and on that basis, it is considered that the development would not prejudice the HMR targets.

Affordable Housing The Council’s Interim Planning Statement (IPS) implements the requirements of Planning Policy Statement 3 in respect of affordable housing. PPS3 advises local authorities to secure the provision of affordable housing when dealing with planning applications for 15 or more dwellings. Furthermore, the RSS advises that up to 30% of new housing in the Rotherham Borough may need to be affordable.

A Strategic Housing Market Assessment has been undertaken to establish the level of need for affordable housing in the Borough in accordance with national policy and the work carried out locally to assess need concluded that the following policy will be applied:

“For planning applications for 15 or more houses or for sites of 0.5 hectares or more, no less than 25% of all dwellings shall be provided on site, as affordable units. 14% of which to be available as social rented housing and 11% as affordable intermediate tenures.”

The IPS also goes on to examine the economic viability of a scheme and states:

“there may also be instances where affordable housing provision renders a site’s redevelopment for residential purposes less viable than a competing alternative use. Where a Developer wishes the Borough Council to consider such a situation, financial evidence, to be treated confidentially by the Council, will be required to support such a claim. The Borough Council will appoint an independent professional when viability issues are raised.”

In this respect the Applicant has submitted a full financial viability appraisal to assess the value of delivering the total requirement for S106 obligations, including affordable housing provision. Following an initial assessment of this by Council Officers it was scrutinised by expert consultants employed on behalf of the Council to verify its findings and conclusions.

In assessing the financial viability of the site, the Applicant’s advisors confirmed that after calculating the value of the site, only £10,848,947 was available for S106 contributions, which includes affordable housing provision. This assessment was scrutinised by the Council’s consultants and the conclusions reached were significantly different due to the fact that they considered that the Applicant had significantly overvalued the existing use value of the site, based on an over optimistic view of the current employment

71 market and the fact that the site is not wholly allocated for employment use, nor does it have any extant lawful uses. The Applicant also sought to include a developer return as part of this value, at a level which was considered to be unreasonable as the profit reflected an increase in the value of the land as a result of this planning permission being implemented if planning permission is approved. The Council’s consultants therefore concluded by stating that that the development would still be financially viable if all S106 obligations were implemented as well as 25% affordable housing provision.

Despite this and due to the significant differences in the way the two consultants applied their calculations of the existing use value of the site, the Applicant submitted further information relating to the phased approach of the development and the costs which would need to be outlaid in each. This information was assessed by Council Officers who agreed that due to the history of the site and the fact that the Applicant incurred significant costs when creating the development platforms during the restoration process, these costs should form part of the new community development abnormal costs. In this respect, it was agreed that a maximum of 21% affordable housing across the site would still render the site economically viable, anything above this figure may jeopardise the entire development.

The proposals for the delivery of the affordable housing are therefore set out below:

• Phase 1: 5% of 915 units being 45 Affordable Housing units provided that such units will not have to be delivered until after the completion of the 510 th open market dwelling.

• Phase 2: 22.5% of 966 units being 217 Affordable Housing units.

• Phase 3: 25% of 984 units being 246 Affordable Housing units.

• Phase 4: 30% of 1025 units being 308 Affordable Housing units.

This is the minimum level of affordable housing to be provided, in the event that more units are developed, the affordable housing provision will increase proportionally.

The Affordable Housing units will be provided in the ratio of 44% Shared Ownership units and 56% Social Rented Accommodation to be made available to qualifying persons, which is in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the IPS.

This phased approach has been suggested to enable the Applicant to realise a proportion of value from the site prior to providing the affordable units. This is due to the fact that significant costs are required to install major infrastructure and utilities in the early phases of development. The Applicant will not begin to gain any profit from the site until the later phases where a higher proportion of affordable units are proposed.

72

It should also be noted that the nearest comparable site to this is the British Land development, located close to Meadowhall which was granted planning permission by SCC recently for approximately 900 dwellings only achieved 15% affordable housing units due to the perceived high infrastructure costs.

To conclude it is clear that the high infrastructure costs and requirement to create development platforms mean that the development is unable to support more than 21% affordable housing. Therefore because the viability is a consideration of the IPS, the Applicant’s assessment of viability has been accepted by the Council as a material consideration in this instance and 21% affordable housing across the development at a ratio of 44% Shared Ownership units and 56% Social Rented Accommodation is supported.

Loss of Green Belt The southern part of the site, including what is now the containment bund, the reservoirs and land to the south west of the reservoirs is allocated as Green Belt on the UDP Proposals Plan. This Green Belt land was added as an addition to the Green Belt by the Rotherham Green Belt Local Plan (RGBP) in June 1990.

The applicant’s argue that the position of the Green Belt boundary as defined on the UDP Proposals Map follows the boundary of the former spoil tip associated with the Waverley Colliery and the Coking Plant. The closure of these industries and subsequent reclamation of the site leading to the removal of the spoil tip has meant that the Green Belt boundary no longer relates to any of these features nor does it fulfil any meaningful function when tested against the purposes of including this land in the Green Belt.

The reason the RGBP added land to the Green Belt was to maintain the separation of the existing residential areas from the industrial areas of Orgreave and Waverley. Clearly since all work has ceased on the former colliery the function of separating industry from residential no longer exists to the same extent. The reclamation of the site also has meant that the Green Belt boundary no longer relates to any physical features on the ground and is based on an artificial separation line. It is therefore clear that the existing Green Belt boundary is based on previous land use demarcations that no longer exist and does not form a defensible boundary of any sorts as required by PPG2; ‘Green Belts.’

As a result of the lack of any clear defensible boundary relating to the existing Green Belt boundary on the site currently, proposals to create the new community encroach into the Green Belt by crossing through the current boundary. This is an area of approximately 2.32 ha located along the waterfront.

The southern boundary of the proposed new community is fixed by the existence of the reservoir to the south, which in turn was fixed by the restoration levels and development platforms. These lakes therefore form a

73 new prominent and clear boundary as the former spoil heap did when considering the location of the Green Belt boundary back in 1990.

It is therefore considered that the encroachment of development into the Green Belt, along the reservoir frontage is a logical proposal that is acceptable given the historic reason for identifying the existing boundary, even though it will mean a loss of 2.32ha of Green Belt land. It will follow a definitive line on the ground, as advised by PPG 2 ‘Green Belts’, and will delineate the extent of the built area in this location. The three lakes are a vital part of the water management regime for this development and so will remain a long-term feature of the landscape, clearly marking out the Green Belt boundary. Similarly the containment cell will also remain a long-term feature serving the same function.

Furthermore the issue of establishing a new Green Belt boundary in this location is currently being assessed as part of the LDF process due to the reasons outlined above.

In summary it is considered that the current Green Belt boundary, where it defined an area around the former Orgreave coking plant is no longer fit for purpose and requires redefining to follow a definitive, defensible line on the ground. The applicant’s suggested boundary around the reservoir is considered to be acceptable. The loss of the existing Green Belt boundary would be compensated by the creation of the new lake side boundary between the urban edge of the development and the remaining Green Belt. These reasons are therefore considered to be justified and qualify as very special circumstances as set out in paragraph 3.2 of PPG2. The encroachment of the development into the existing Green Belt boundary is therefore not considered to harm the openness or appearance of the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness.

Consideration was also given to whether Highwall Park should be incorporated into the Green Belt as part of the LDF process. However it was considered that this area will form the function of an urban park with infrastructure development such as open surface water drainage channels with bridges across, a bus route and lighting of footpaths within it. Any such development would therefore likely to be regarded as inappropriate development within the Green Belt and would need to be justified by very special circumstances. It was therefore agreed that this is not a feasible proposition in this instance.

Education Provision The new development of 3,890 homes will be aimed at accommodating approximately 8,000 people. The indications are that a development of this size would, using a planning formula of 3 pupils per year group per 100 houses, create a need for school accommodation for around 819 Primary Pupils and 585 Secondary Pupils. The formula for calculating this is set out below.

74 There is spare capacity currently in the local Primary Schools, which will increase as the birth rate falls. The Waverley site is likely to be placed within the catchment area of the nearest primary school which is Catcliffe Junior and Infant School. There is surplus capacity in the school of around 40 spaces and it is forecast to remain at this level (the capacity is currently due to be re- assessed due to the building of a children’s centre within the existing accommodation and this will reduce this figure to around 20). Other schools with accommodation (Brinsworth Howarth could provide 15 places but is more distant from the Waverley site).

The spare primary accommodation could provide places initially for a small number of new residents from Waverley. This would, however, be quickly filled and there will be a demand for a Primary Schools in the Waverley area. Following construction and occupation of all dwellings in the development, the demand based, on a two form-entry (planned admission number of 60), would give a requirement for two schools.

This has been based on the following formula:

In order to calculate the need for the primary schools a planning formula of 3 (pupil yield) per 100 per year group = 117 pupils per year group has been used.

This planning formula used by Local Authorities varies from 2.5 to 4 pupils per year group per 100 houses. Using 3 is at the lower end of the scale, however without a more accurate estimate of pupil numbers which would only come from a detailed break-down of the type and size of houses planned, this is the most accurate way of calculating. Research carried out for the DCSF by Hedra in 2005/05 on planning projections used by 15 Local Authorities for primary pupil yield varied from 25-40 per year group per 1000 dwellings – Secondary 16-40 per 1,000 dwellings. Rotherham projections are at the lower end of this scale based on our experience.

Based on the above, this gives 7 x 117 = 819 and will almost fill 2 x 60 places through Primary schools (840 places). This development will therefore create a demand for 2 Primary schools, each large enough for 2 form entry, plus appropriately sized early years provision. Each school will also require 30 Foundation Stage (nursery places) giving a total of 900 spaces.

The required space for each school based on DCSF formula is therefore in the range of 17,320 – 19,300m2, which is what is proposed on the Framework Plan and identified in the S106 Agreement.

The demand for Secondary School places is smaller and there would be sufficient provision for secondary education within the area. Aston Comprehensive and Brinsworth Comprehensive Schools are relatively close. The closest secondary school would probably be within Sheffield. Pupils wishing to attend Rotherham secondary schools would probably displace Sheffield residents at Year 7. It is possible therefore that some additional classrooms would be required at the secondary schools but the timescales

75 correspond with the commencement of lower pupil numbers feeding into secondary schools following recent falls in birth rate.

Sheffield City Council have raised concerns that no secondary school provision is proposed as part of the development. In this respect there are a number of pupils living within Sheffield attending schools in Rotherham. SCC acknowledge that the proposed new community will take a number of years to develop, however forecast that in 2018 pupil numbers will increase to a position where additional places are required. This fact will be compounded by the secondary children who are generated as part of the proposed Waverley New Community receiving preferential placement at Brinsworth where traditionally Sheffield children have been placed. SCC forecast that approximately 250 pupils will be ‘pushed’ from Brinsworth School back into Sheffield. Given that it is forecast that Hinde House School will be full to capacity additional places will therefore need to be created for these Sheffield children. As a result of this, SCC have requested that a financial contribution is sought from the applicant towards the construction of a new secondary school in or near the Lower Don Valley.

The applicant has been made aware of this request and has subsequently submitted information relating to projected population changes and the influence of the Education Acts on SCC’s request for a contribution. Their paper concludes that the gradual reduction in the availability of secondary school places in Rotherham for Sheffield children, will allow Sheffield to better deploy its own rising surpluses. The group most affected will be those who at some uncertain future date will be unable to obtain a place at a Rotherham secondary school whilst living in Sheffield. Sheffield has however invested heavily in its secondary schools since 2000 being an early proponent of the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and being a pathfinder authority under the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme. Very few Sheffield secondary schools, if any, will not have been rebuilt/remodelled by 2014. It is therefore entirely possible that this group will no longer exist by the time easy access to Rotherham secondary schools is markedly diminished, because the group will believe that they have a viable alternative within Sheffield.

This information has been scrutinised by RMBC Education Officers and due to the lack of evidence base and policy justification for a request for a financial contribution from SCC, it is concluded that they will not be disadvantaged by the development and their claim for a financial contribution for secondary school provision is without merit. RMBC will therefore not be pursuing this request.

Conclusion Local planning authorities must determine planning applications in accordance with the statutory Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. One such consideration is whether the plan policies are relevant and up to date. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 provides that if there is a conflict between policies in an RSS or policies in a DPD, the most recent policy will take precedence.

76

In those cases where the Development Plan is not relevant, for example because there are no relevant policies, the planning application should be determined on its merits in the light of all the relevant material considerations.

In this instance, the application site is predominantly allocated as White Land in the UDP. This policy was written and included within the UDP at a time when the site was being opencast and was therefore relevant at the time of adoption. Since this time, the site has been reclaimed and development platforms have been created rendering the Policy obsolete and out of date. The most up to date guidance therefore includes those included within the adopted RSS and National Guidance.

In determining whether the principle of this application the material considerations include the need for housing within the borough in accordance with PPS3 which requires that, when planning for housing growth, Local Planning Authorities identify enough land to provide for 15 years worth of supply, the number of houses required over that period is set out in the Regional Spatial Strategy. At any given time the Local Planning Authority must also identify enough “deliverable” land to meet needs for the next five years Housing requirement (known as the five year supply). In order to be “deliverable” a site must be available, suitable and achievable.

In this instance when RMBC and SCC prepared the Sheffield and Rotherham Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) which was finalised in April 2009, it gave a 5 year land supply based on a figure of 4837 however this is below the 6,190 dwellings needed to give a five year supply. This, in addition to the fact that Rotherham has since been given Growth Point status requires RMBC to allocate additional land to meet the targets set out in the RSS which will result in the need to allocate a substantial area of Green Belt land. The release of Waverley for housing development will therefore make a substantial contribution to the 15 year requirement and also the 5 year supply of deliverable land utilising a brownfield site which is in accordance with PPS3 and supported by RSS Policy H1 which supports the provision and distribution of housing and is therefore a relevant material consideration when determining the principle of development.

In addition to assessing the need for housing, the Council’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) detailed the composition of existing households and expressed future need for particular house types as surpluses or deficits for particular dwelling sizes (by number of bedrooms). The SHMA states that Rotherham has a surplus of three bedroom properties and a deficit of one, two and four+ bedroom houses, with the greatest deficit existing for two bedroom properties. It is acknowledged that the application does not include the mix of housing, however when determining applications for Reserved Matters consideration will be given to ensuring that the housing mix complies with the policies that will be in place at that time based on future versions of the SHMA.

77 When considering the principle of development the above material planning considerations are considered to be relevant in the absence of any up to date policies in the adopted UDP. Further material planning considerations are set out below and should be assessed in this regard in accordance with Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Access to Facilities and Services

Local Centres The masterplan proposes a local centre in the heart of the development, known as Orgreave Square. This centre will provide a mixture of uses such as retail, food and drink and community facilities such as a health centre, library, pub / restaurant and sheltered housing. Permission is being sought for up to 1,400sqm of retail floorspace (max net of 975sqm in one unit), 1,950sqm of A3 restaurant and café floorspace, 2,040sqm of D1 floorspace and approximately 2,600sqm of sheltered housing accommodation in this area of the development.

This area has been designed to provide a focus for the vast majority of community activity and will promote civic life whilst also reducing the reliance of private car use due to it location in the centre of the development. This local centre has also been designed to be the mixed use link to the proposed Helical Governetz office proposals and will form the primary retail element of the community catering for the needs of residents as well as employees.

The Waterfront area is also proposed as a local centre presenting an opportunity for proposed leisure uses attracting lunchtime and evening economy uses. Permission is sought in this area of the development for up to 1,550 A3 and A4 uses, 1,800sqm of D1 leisure uses, 100sqm A1 retail and a 5,600sqm C1 hotel use.

The applicant has examined whether there is a need for the proposed retail development and has looked at the available expenditure that would be generated by a development of approximately 4,000 new households. Assuming a new population of 9,686 (based on 2.49 people per household) in Waverley the applicant suggests that when the convenience goods expenditure per capita is applied to the proposed new population it can be seen that in 2021 there is capacity for £16.08m spend at a projected £1,660 per capita for convenience goods.

The turnover of the proposed development has been calculated by the applicant based on the scenario that a ‘top four’ convenience retailer (Tesco, Asda, Morrison and Sainsbury’s) will occupy the store. Based on the data provided from Mintel UK Retail Ranking 2008 the projected residual convenience spends of future residents of Waverley equates to approximately £3,463,350.

With regard to comparison goods this provides some £38.25m comparison capacity for the new community. The likely spend required for the three

78 comparison units proposed has been calculated by the applicants as being a total of £1,500,000, less than 4% of total comparison spend available in 2021.

It is considered that the above information and calculations demonstrates a need for the quantum of retail floorspace proposed, which includes the single retail unit (max 975sqm net), dry cleaners, chemist, post office and a sports shop. All of which are located within the two local centres of Orgreave Square and the Waterfront.

The applicant has agreed to a maximum gross floorspace of 1300sqm of retail floorspace in any one unit, thereby preventing the entire approved quantum of retail floorspace being provided in one unit, which would not meet the guidance set out in PPS6. The applicant has also provided a phasing plan which sets out the delivery of services and facilities. This is set out below in relation to the local centres:

Phase Year No. Dwellings Uses 1 1-5 915 Pub / restaurant and café 2 no. small shops Community centre and library Bandstand / performance space

2 5-10 966 Foodstore and 2 no. small shops 10 small business units 3 no. live / work units

3 11-15 984 Bar / restaurant and café Commercial gym Sports shop Health centre

4 16-20 1025 Waterfront Hotel

The range of facilities and services proposed is considered to be acceptable. The proposed retail uses are appropriate in size and scale for a local centre and for meeting local needs generated by the new community, which is central to creating a sustainable community. In this respect, should permission be granted then it is important that the uses will be delivered, and delivered at an appropriate phase of development. The Design and Access statement shows the anticipated phasing which seems appropriate in ensuring that facilities are provided in a timely fashion, however in order to ensure the delivery, conditions will be imposed to prevent the full build out of residential units without the provision of local services. These conditions will ensure the delivery of a well thought out sustainable community.

Retail As outlined above the proposals include some element of retail facilities on the site, however in terms of accessibility to existing services and facilities, Rotherham and Sheffield centres are located approximately 3 miles from the

79 site as well as the Meadowhall Shopping Centre approximately 4.5 miles away. All three of these centres include a large number of comparison retail, including the sale of fresh food, food and drink uses and banks.

It is acknowledged that these are not within walking distance, however as explored in further detail below they are highly accessible by public transport, thereby reducing the reliance on the single car use.

Notwithstanding the above, the existing Morrison’s Supermarket is located on the edge of the site, within an approximate 10 minute walk distance, public transport once again will make this facility highly accessible should future residents wish to use transport as opposed to walking.

Schools As previously stated, the proposals include 2no. 2 form entry primary schools that will also provide provision for nursery accommodation. Each school will be no more than a 10 minute walk away from any of the dwellings in the new community. Prior to the construction of the first school, capacity is available in the existing Catcliffe Primary School, which will be approximately 10 to 15 minute walk away, and whilst this is not ideal it is considered to be acceptable during the early phases of development.

The closest secondary schools in Rotherham are located at Aston and Brinsworth. These are both approximately a 40 minute walk away from the site. Due to the distance and road network in this area (particularly the Parkway) it is unlikely that pupils would walk or cycle to either of these schools. It is therefore considered that a school bus would be required to transport these pupils to and from school on a daily basis, however this is not uncommon for secondary school pupils and is considered to be acceptable given the short distance they will have to travel by this mode of transport.

Community Facilities The PCT have advised that the nearest G.P. Health Centre is located in Treeton, however this is full to capacity from existing patients in the outlying villages of Catcliffe and Treeton. The proposals therefore include a 1,300sqm Health Centre that will cater for the needs of the new community. It is acknowledged that this will not be open until the latter end of the development, however an interim position, which includes a 100sqm unit, is proposed to accommodate early residents of the new community. This will be provided alongside a pharmacy to ensure the needs of the community in terms of health care are met.

The nearest library is located approximately 1.5 to 2 miles away in Brinsworth, therefore to accord with national standards (set out in the Museums Libraries Archives Council (MLA) ‘Public Libraries, Archives and New Development - A Standard Charge Approach’ Document) to ensure no resident lives outside a one or two mile radius of a static library, the proposals include a new library. This will be provided following completion of 915 dwellings and is likely to be located in the Orgreave Square / Mixed Use link area. This location will

80 ensure that all residents are no more than a 10 minute walk away from this new facility.

A community centre, post office and a range of leisure facilities are also proposed within the site therefore catering to the needs of the new community whilst also offering new facilities for residents of the outlying villages. It is acknowledged that a financial contribution is being sought to improve off site adult pitches rather than providing on site provision, however these are highly accessible for existing and future residents and are within a short walking distance of the site.

Conclusion It is concluded that the proposals include a wide range of facilities relating to retail, community, food and drink and leisure uses, thereby ensuring that the future needs of the community will be met on site. Where this is not possible and in particular in relation to the provision of comparison shopping and secondary education provision, proposals for improvements to public transport provision will ensure that these are highly accessible throughout the week and at weekends.

Highways and Transportation Issues

Policy Background Policy T1 of the RSS states that the Region will aim to reduce travel demand, traffic growth and congestion, shift to low environmental impact modes, improve journey time reliability, reduce energy consumption, secure air quality improvement, improve public transport and accessibility by non-car modes and promote high safety and personal security. Policy T2 establishes maximum parking standards and Policy T3 encourages improved public transport provision.

UDP Policies T3 and T3.1 also encourage existing and improved public transport provision, whilst Policy T4 promotes comprehensive traffic management schemes and T6 aims to locate development close to public transport, discourage development which causes traffic congestion and promote safe and convenient access for pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities, as well as ensuring highway safety for car and public transport users.

National Policy Guidance is contained within PPG13 ‘Transport’. The key objectives are: • To promote more sustainable transport choices. • To promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling. • To reduce the need to travel, especially by car.

Access to the Development The site lies in an accessible location relative to the trunk road network. The main point of access is via the B6533 Poplar Way, which joins the A630 Sheffield Parkway. This is a key link between Sheffield City Centre and M1

81 Junction 33, which lies less than 2 miles north-east of the site. Rotherham Town Centre lies 3.1 miles to the north.

To the south of the site access to the M1 at junction 31 is available via the B6200 and the A57. Local roads surrounding the site include the B6533 Poplar Way and the B6066 Highfield Spring, and B6067 Treeton Lane / Wood Lane. Furthermore there is a requirement to reinstate Highfield Lane, which was closed during the opencast operations. This is expected to be complete by December 2011.

Access to the site is a consideration of this application. It is shown as being predominantly from the realigned Highfield Lane where it meets Poplar Way and from the existing Highfield Spring. Details of these access points have been submitted and assessed. The indicative framework plan and the parameter plans provide details of the internal road network and hierarchy of streets. This level of information is considered to be sufficient to allow an analysis of the impact of development within the site and on the surrounding road network. The hierarchy of streets also provides an indication of how the site could be developed bearing in mind the need for main routes through the site serving public transport needs.

Highway Impact A Transport Assessment (TA) has been submitted in support of the application; it considers the impact of the proposed new community, in addition to the proposed 60,000sqm of office accommodation, 3,000sqm metre hotel and 475sqm of ancillary retail and leisure uses, which is being dealt with under a separate planning application.

In order to minimise the amount of trip rates by the single car user, the rate adopted for the assessment takes into account the proposal to introduce improved public transport provision to the area, which is considered in more detail below and will be secured through the delivery of a Travel Plan.

The traffic distribution has been determined by assessing the distribution of trips to and from the surrounding area and confirmed by a gravity model, which was a method agreed by RMBC and SCC Officers as well as the Highways Agency.

In an attempt to create a robust assessment of the impact of development, trip assignment to the highway network was provided by the SATURN traffic model developed for Sheffield and Rotherham. However, existing vehicular trips on the network have been prevented from re-assigning which gives a strong analysis of the highway network in the vicinity of the site at the request of the Highways Agency.

Table 7.2 from the TA, reproduced below, shows the impact of the development on the surrounding network. This forecast has been taken at year 2026, assuming the development is complete:

82

Operational assessments have been carried out at 17 junctions in the vicinity of the site. Where it has been established that highway improvements are

83 required these have been designed to ensure that the network can adequately accommodate the additional trips. The proposed improvements are itemised below.

A630 Parkway / B6533 Poplar Way / Europa Way The TA has been based on the assumption that the following improvements to this junction are committed:

• The signalisation of the two roundabouts • A dedicated left turn slip between Poplar Way and the Sheffield-bound carriageway of the Parkway.

These are not committed therefore the applicant will either have to show that these are not necessary to accommodate the current application or to provide these.

Further mitigation has been identified:

• Creation of a third circulatory lane at the Europa Way junction. • Widening of the Europa Way approach to two lanes.

B6533 Poplar Way / B6066 Poplar Way / B6066 Highfield Spring The proposed mitigation measures are to amend the layout of the existing roundabout and to introduce signal control. These improvements will supersede improvements required at this junction a part of the AMP (phase 2) approval.

B6066 Highfield Spring / Brunel Way (AMP north) The proposal is to convert the current five-arm roundabout to four-arm signal control, which is a condition on the extant Highfield Commercial approval.

Further improvements have been identified:

• An additional lane for vehicles turning left out of Brunel Way. • Widen the northbound Highfield Spring approach to three lanes.

B6066 Poplar Way / B6066 Orgreave Road The following improvements have been identified:

• Conversion to signal control. • Widen the Poplar Way approach to two lanes.

B6066 Highfield Spring / B6066 Highfield Lane The following improvements have been identified:

• Increase the diameter (ICD) from 55m to 60m • Widening of all the approaches. • Increasing the merge lengths of each exit

84 The above will be unnecessary if the proposal to construct Waverley Link Road is implemented. In which case this roundabout will become redundant.

B6066 Main Street / B6067 Treeton Lane, Catcliffe This is currently a three-arm mini-roundabout. The proposal is to:

• Convert the junction to signal control. • Widen the northbound Main Street approach. • Increase the flare length on the other two approaches.

B6066 Highfield Lane / Orgreave Lane / Rotherham Road The following measures are proposed for this junction in Sheffield:

• Convert to signal control • Create a right-turn lane on the Orgreave Lane approach. • Increase the length of the right-turn lane on the Highfield Lane approach. • Introduce a left-turn lane on the Rotherham Road approach.

Note that Sheffield City Council is the highway authority for this junction.

B6200 Retford Road / Rotherham Road The following measures are proposed for this junction in Sheffield:

• Convert to signal control • Widen both Retford Road approaches • Introduce a right-turn lane for the westbound Retford Road approach.

Note that Sheffield City Council is the highway authority for this junction.

M1 Junction 33 / A630 Parkway The following measures are proposed for this junction.

• Widening part of the circulatory carriageway • Widening on the Parkway approach.

Note that the Highways Agency act for the highway authority in respect of the M1 motorway.

The modelling carried out shows that, following completion of the development and these improvements, delay will increase on Rotherway by an average of some 4 minutes per vehicle in the peak period. Conversely delay will be reduced on the Parkway. It is considered that there is potential to amend the signal timings so that the delay on the Parkway remains no worse off, which should provide an opportunity to reduce delay on Rotherway. The Highways Agency’s consultants have been asked to consider this.

B6533 Poplar Way between B6066 Highfield Spring and the Parkway junction

85 The TA is based on this section of road becoming a dual carriageway. This work is a condition of the approval of phase 2 of the Advanced Manufacturing Park. However, if this is not undertaken, as part of the AMP development, then it will be required to accommodate the traffic arising from this application.

M1 Junction 34 (Tinsley Roundabouts) The development will lead to some extra traffic passing through this junction, which is already considered to be at capacity, and has little or no scope for direct improvements. Sheffield City Council is promoting a scheme to relieve the junction of some through traffic by constructing a new road to bypass the junction known as the Fixed Link (formerly known as the Halfpenny Link). A contribution of £240,000 has been agreed towards this scheme based on the number of additional trips the development will add to this junction.

Road Safety

An analysis of road traffic accidents has shown that they are no accident hotspots in the vicinity of the site that will be unduly adversely affected by the development proposals. However, increases in traffic flows are likely to lead to more accidents. If it is assumed that the accident rate will increase pro rata then the development traffic would result in slightly less that five additional injury, accidents per year.

Impact on J33 and the M1 In addition to those junctions identified above which require improvements to mitigate against the impact of development, an assessment of the Highway’s Agency’s M1 Junction 33 has also been undertaken by the Applicant. The junction currently operates as a 4 arm grade separated roundabout junction, with slip roads feeding on and off the M1. To the north is the A630 Rotherway into Rotherham and to the south is the A630 Parkway to Sheffield. Each entry point to the roundabout is traffic signal controlled.

To assess the operational impact of traffic associated with the entire Waverley development, at 2026, it has been assumed that the MOVA system will be in place, which is a requirement of the AMP development now that the floorspace threshold has now been reached. In addition, the Highway’s Agency’s own managed motorway proposals, which effectively permits use of the hard shoulder during the busiest traffic period, is also included in future year modelling of this junction.

The Highways Agency’s own model (VISSIM) of M1 junctions has been used to forecast the impact of the additional traffic on this junction and has indicated that without any mitigation delays on the northbound A630 Parkway will increase by an average of 7½ minutes and 4½ minutes in the morning and evening peak hours respectively in 2026.

These delays were considered by RMBC, SCC and Highways Agency Officers as being unacceptable and contrary to PPG13, therefore the Applicant was asked to re-model this junction with part of the circulatory carriageway widened and widening on the Parkway approach. With these

86 improvements the revised modelling showed that, in the AM peak hour, the delay on the Parkway would reduce, following completion of the development, by 3½ minutes while the delay on Rotherway would increase by 4¾ minutes. This effectively means that the mitigation would actually improve the situation on Parkway in 2026 but to the detriment of Rotherway. However it is considered that there is potential to reduce the projected delay on Rotherway at the expense of delay on the Parkway by altering the length of green time of the signals on this junction. The Highways Agency’s consultants have been asked to consider this further and provide the LPA with their findings.

Public Transport Provision Public transport provision currently passing close to the site includes the 32 service which links Rotherham and Sheffield via Catcliffe and Brinsworth, providing a half hourly frequency. In addition, the X14/X15 circulatory service provides 1 bus per hour on each service with the X14 operating clockwide from Sheffield, via Parkway to Waverley, Catcliffe and Treeton, returning to Sheffield via Swallownest and Handsworth. The X15 will operate the same route in reverse.

Finally the A1 service which operates along Highfield Spring offers a link to Sheffield, Rotherham and Meadowhall Interchange on a half hourly basis.

Comments from SYPTE have indicated that these service timetables are not co-ordinated and so the effective wait time for a bus from Waverley would be up to 30 minutes. Service 32 to Rotherham runs reasonably directly via Brinsworth and only the proposed Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) will offer faster journey times. Use of service 32 to Sheffield is more circuitous, via Manor Top and Arbourthorne and is unattractive for commuters. Service X14/X15 operates directly to Sheffield at present via Sheffield Parkway offering fast journey times and the proposed BRT would be similar.

Proposed Phase 1 Provision The first phase of the Waverley development will be delivered to the north of the site, immediately south of Poplar Way and west of the re-instated Highfield Lane route (Catcliffe Gate). By 2014, the Applicant’s expect that up to 400 new dwellings could be provided, the majority within a 5 minute walking distance of the existing bus stops on Poplar Way serving the 32 and X14/X15 routes. Direct access from the site will be provided on to Poplar Way from where paved and lit routes to the bus stops are available. In addition to this the Applicant will be required through the provision of the S106 Agreement to provide SYPTE with a financial contribution of £40,000 towards the provision of an additional two bus stops on Poplar Way prior to the occupation of any dwellings. This will ensure that they are easily accessible to all future residents of Phase 1 of the proposed development.

From October 2009, the 32 service will provide 2 buses per hour in each direction (hourly in the evenings and at weekends) between Rotherham and Sheffield, via Catcliffe. During discussions with the Network manager at First South Yorkshire, the operator of local bus services, it has been explained that the 32 service effectively operates in two parts; between Rotherham and

87 Catcliffe (Morrisons) and between Sheffield and Handsworth. The section of route between Catcliffe and Handsworth has fewest passengers and, as observed during occupancy counts in April 2008, there is spare passenger capacity on the 32 service, sufficient to accommodate demand from the new housing in the early years.

In addition there is the X14/X15 service linking Sheffield to Swallownest via Catcliffe (and Poplar Way). This currently operates the same route through Catcliffe as the 32 service, and runs every half hour.

The Applicant’s claim that the majority of Phase One of the development covering up to 400 dwellings to the north of the site to be provided by 2014 are within a 5 minute walk distance ‘as the crow flies’ (400m) of existing stops and services using Poplar Way. SYPTE and RMBC would broadly agree with this statement, and accept that a small number would fall outside this distance during the latter construction of Phase One however improvements and changes to bus stops required as part of the S106 Agreement would help to further mitigate this situation.

As such, the initial phase of the development, prior to the likely introduction of BRT/Interchange, will be within walking distance of two bus services offering a combined frequency of four buses per hour to Sheffield and two per hour to Rotherham and with existing spare capacity. As such, no additional proposals have been identified for this first phase other than the provision of the two additional bus stops on Poplar Way. The proposals are therefore considered to be in accordance with the provisions of RSS Policy T3.

One outstanding issue however is that regardless of the level of existing service around the site being able to theoretically being able to cater for the forecast public transport mode share, SYPTE remain concerned that this level of service will not be attractive enough to generate the level of demand required to meet mode share targets. They feel therefore that funding to improve services is required to improve this situation. This is explored further under the assessment of the Travel Plan.

Provision beyond 2014 As this application does not include the Park and Ride / BRT, which will be subject to a separate application by SYPTE, there are two possible scenarios beyond 2014; either BRT/Interchange is achieved and delivers a step change in public transport provision to the site, or BRT is delayed or unsuccessful.

If BRT is delivered, it will compete for passengers with existing Waverley bus services, especially service 32, both at the Rotherham end of the route and for journeys between Brinsworth and Sheffield. Although regular services will offer more stops than BRT, First bus service anticipates that the 32 would lose a major part of its market to BRT, and therefore would be looking for other opportunities to replace the lost market. Following discussions between SYPTE and First, it is believed that diversions of the 32 through the site could provide some of the additional passenger numbers required.

88 Route options through the site would however reflect commercial decisions and the timing and phased location of development would influence those decisions. As an example, diverting from Highfield Spring to Highfield Lane, to pass through the Waverley site, will have little impact on run times and diversion decisions are likely to be based on the speed of expansion at AMP (which has not been developed as quickly as anticipated), how quickly the Highfield Commercial / Helical Governetz development comes forward, and the phasing of the New Community development along Highfield Lane.

With BRT, the additional market could also be secured through wider diversions through the site, to get closer to parts of the development towards the reservoirs as and when those parts of the site are delivered.

If BRT is not delivered, the 32 service will likely continue as present. Diversions to existing services would be more commercially sensitive, particularly if this meant that existing markets were affected, and it is considered likely that subsidy would be required to increase the 3/hr frequency that the 32 currently offers. Likewise, in later years of the development, as the community expands towards the reservoirs, funds will be required to provide an additional service that penetrates the site. While the intention would be that the main part of the site would have direct access to four buses each hour, any route penetrating the more exposed parts of the site would operate less frequently (hourly), yet provide opportunity to change on to more frequent services to Rotherham or Sheffield within the main part of the site, around the district centre. Even those residents furthest from Highfield Lane will have good walk links to the neighbourhood centre and a balance will be struck between walk distance and frequency of service.

Discussions between the Applicant, SYPTE and First have identified that, at current prices and current standards, the cost of adding an extra bus to a service cycle is around £150,000 per year. The costs would be higher if it were to cover Sundays and evenings, or if higher standard buses were subsequently required.

Forecast Bus Demand and Revenues Through the programme of Transport Workstream meetings a number of assumptions have been agreed and it is these assumptions that combine to provide the following predictions of peak hour bus passenger demand, associated with completion of the New Community.

• AM peak: Inbound to the site = 111 Outbound from the site = 423 • PM peak: Inbound to the site = 288 Outbound from the site = 173 In addition, forecasts of trip distribution by mode have also been derived resulting in the following calculations:

• 18.14% of Rotherham trips will be by bus • 22.94% of Sheffield trips will be by bus

89 An assessment of the capacity of bus services by the Applicant shows that there is spare capacity on the existing 32 service, with four buses per hour linking to Sheffield and 2 per hour to Rotherham. Assuming a spare capacity of 25 per bus, based on the 2008 passenger counts, this would indicate that there is spare capacity for 50 new passengers to Rotherham and 100 to Sheffield. Based on the busiest AM peak forecasts shown in the table above, we can deduce that there is sufficient existing capacity to accommodate 10 years of new demand to Rotherham and 6 years to Sheffield.

As such, additional buses would be required to accommodate new passengers for the full development. Assuming an additional bus would provide capacity for 40 new passengers. The Applicant has concluded the following:

• 1 extra bus to Rotherham will provide for 17 years • 2 extra buses to Rotherham will serve the full development • 1 extra bus to Sheffield will provide for 8 years • 2 extra buses to Sheffield will provide for 11 years • 3 extra buses to Sheffield will provide for 13 years • 4 extra buses to Sheffield will provide for 16 years • 5 extra buses to Sheffield will provide for 18 years • 6 extra buses to Sheffield will serve the full development

Based on these calculations, delivery of the BRT proposals will more than provide for the additional demand in bus passengers required to accommodate targets of bus use for the New Community. In addition, this would result in full operation of the Public Transport Interchange and bring the remainder of the site within reasonable walking distance to a high frequency service linking residents to both Rotherham and Sheffield.

If the BRT is not delivered, nor the associated Park and Ride, then additional bus services would need to be required at the dates indicated above. However, new passengers will also generate new revenue to the extent that additional services could be self financing.

Footpath and Cycleway Provision There currently is a reasonable network of pedestrian and cycle routes that encompass the site and are being reinstated as part of the restoration of the site. These include Public Rights of Way, Bridelways and links to the Trans Pennine Trail. Good linkages also exist between the main land uses in the

90 area such as Morrison’s supermarket and the nearby villages of Catcliffe, Treeton and Handsworth.

The River Rother and the two railway lines act as physical constraints to access to the site but each have existing footbridges which in their current state are in a poor state of repair and are unattractive to walkers and cyclists. However, each has the potential to be enhanced. There is potential therefore for these routes to be enhanced which will penetrate the site from the surrounding neighbourhoods.

Travel Plan Measures The Applicant has submitted a Framework Travel Plan as part of the Transport Assessment to support the planning application. This document is aimed at reducing the reliance on single person occupancy car use by promoting realistic alternatives, particularly through public transport provision. It will also provide an over-arching strategy for the site and will be updated as individual residential developments are progressed.

The success of the plan will be judged against indicators such as car club participation, bus passenger numbers or traffic counts. Targets will be set and achievement of those targets will be monitored through a programme of ongoing surveys. Monitoring of the Travel Plan will be carried out by the Sustainable Travel Manager (STM and reported to the Travel Plan Steering Group (TPSG)), which will be set up for the development. The TPSG will comprise the Applicant or their named agent of management Company, the Council, Highways Agency and SYPTE, plus as the development progresses, representatives of the tenants and occupiers, including the primary schools.

Where further monitoring / review shows that the implementation of measures achieves the agreed trip rates for each phase of development, this will continue to be monitored through the normal monitoring process. If however it is shown that the implementation of measures fails to achieve the agreed trip rates for this phase, the TPSG will:

• Consider the impact of the extent to which the trip rates are exceeded. • Consider any additional recommendations of the STM, plus any measures recommended by members of the TPSG. • Decide by consensus upon what if any, measures are appropriate to implement, set a timeframe for their implementation and set the review period for the effectiveness of these measures. • Formally advise the Council that trip rates remain in excess of agreed levels (tighter with details of extent), provide information on the extent of the harm that this causes and make recommendations to the Council on potential measures necessary to achieve trip generation, to the agreed levels.

Where despite implementation of corrective measures, trip generation remains above the agreed levels to the extent the Highways Agency consider they must be ‘capped’, application of the monitoring information to the whole

91 site will be used to establish the point at which no further development should proceed. The TPSG will formally advise the Council of this position.

In order to achieve these targets the following items are included in the Framework Plan and will be funded by the Applicant:

• Public Transport o The applicant will be providing the land for the Park and Ride / BRT. o The phased delivery of the development will ensure that early housing will be located around the Park and Ride, maximising opportunities to travel by bus. o The entrance block to each apartment block will be fitted with a real time information system providing details of the choices of mode available. • Information o Travel Packs will be provided to potential homebuyers. o Route maps showing links to various public transport and cycling facilities will be promoted and provided within the Travel Packs. o A community website will provide a wide range of information from site specific details of car clubs, bike clubs and links to car sharing schemes. • Parking Provision o SPG parking standards will be applied and used as maximum values. o Car parking will be designed to minimise its impact on urban form. o Controls on parking throughout the site have been designed through the provision of designated parking areas within residential blocks. o Safe and secure pedal cycle and motorcycle parking facilities will be provided throughout the site. • Car Share o A car share scheme will be established for residents of the new community and, over time, to include employees at adjacent sites. • Car Club o The provision of car club facilities. A minimum of two cars will be provided over the initial phases of development. o Each household will be provided with free membership of the car club for the first year of occupation. • Walking and Cycling o Design of masterplan provides convenient and direct routes for walkers and cyclists through the site. o Good level of permeability, discouraging movements by car. o Provision of pedestrian and cycle networks providing safe links to adjacent communities. o A pool bicycle scheme will be established to allow residents to book use of free bicycles.

92

The above proposals have been assessed by both RMBC and Highway Agency Officers and it is considered that the measures to be taken will assist in reducing the impact of travel on the road network by reducing the reliance on single person occupancy car use. The development is therefore acceptable in this respect.

Conclusion The TA has been submitted in support of the planning application and has been assessed against local, regional and national policy guidance. Following intensive negotiations with the applicant since the submission of the application and the input from the Highways Agency it is considered that the revised TA represents a robust assessment of the impacts of development on the local highway network and Junction 33 of the M1. The junction improvements proposed are also considered to be fair and will mitigate against the impacts of the development.

It is acknowledged that in the short term the development will give rise to a slight increase in delays on this network until the trigger points for junction improvements are reached, however it is considered that this will not give rise to significant highway safety implications and is therefore considered to be acceptable. The proposed improvements to Junction 33 of the M1 will actually improve the delays forecast in 2026 thereby providing wider benefits to all users of this network.

Improvements to the public transport provision within the area are also welcomed and whilst the provision of Bus Rapid Transit cannot be guaranteed, the provision of a public transport interchange within the site will go a significant way to encourage patronage onto public transport and away from the single car use.

Bearing in mind the above considerations and the benefits to J33 of the M1, the proposed development is therefore considered to be acceptable from a highway safety and transportation point of view in that it complies with Local, Regional and National planning guidance in this respect.

Drainage and Flood Risk

Policy Background RSS Policy ENV1 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ states that ‘The Region will manage flood risk pro-actively by reducing the causes of flooding to existing and future development …. and avoid development in high flood risk areas where possible.’

RSS Policy ENV3 ‘Water Quality’ indicates that development that could pollute surface water and underground water resources … close to above ground water resources of reservoirs and some rivers will be prevented.

Planning Policy Statement 25 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ (PPS25) seeks to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding and to direct

93 development away from areas of highest risk. Where new development is exceptionally necessary in such areas, planning policy aims to make it safe without increasing risk elsewhere and where possible reducing flood risk overall.

Sir Michael Pitt Review and Recommendation (December 2008) and pending Floods and Water Management Bill - requirement to manage all surface water flows to minimise the risk of flooding from overland flooding.

Background The site is shown on the Environment Agency (EA) flood risk map as lying mainly within Flood Zone 1; outside the extent of 0.1% (1 in 1000) risk of flooding from major watercourse. However towards the centre of the site it is within Flood Zone 2, which is shown on the masterplan as mostly a green area or reservoirs with no buildings, proposed. Only a small area close to the River Rother is shown as Flood Zone 3 within the development site.

Impact of Flooding and Mitigation A Flood Risk Assessment and an Outline Surface Water Strategy Report were submitted as part of the application. To demonstrate that the proposed development is in compliance with the requirements of PPS25, it was checked against criteria set out within this guidance note.

The reports assess the surface water flows and discharges within the site. They also detail surface water proposals for the restoration scheme and include measures to protect the site and surrounding areas and the River Rother from excessive surface water run off from the site. The key aspects of the assessments are considered to be as follows:

• The construction of three reservoirs designed to attenuate and assist in the control of surface water run off for the proposed future development. The design of the reservoirs have been carried out and approved by the Panel Reservoir Engineer. • The construction of drainage channels to transfer water from the site and discharge at low velocities, into the reservoirs, for the proposed future development. • The diversion of Handsworth Beck and its discharge to the reservoirs minimising the risk of flooding to adjacent land. • The restricted discharge of 5 litres/second/hectare from the reservoirs into the River Rother, maximising full storage capacity within the reservoir and only allowing a minimal and controlled discharge into the river. • The surface water drainage systems are designed on the present recommendation of 1 in 100 year with an allowance of 30% for climate change. • Incorporation of Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SUDs) will assist in reducing the impact of flooding on existing drainage systems. • Proposed diversion of the surface water drainage from the Advance Manufacturing Park (AMP) site from the existing Sheffield Airport

94 sewer in Polar Way, Catcliffe and into the surface water drainage system before discharging into the reservoirs within the Waverley site. • Flood routine for all surface water run off from the restoration site is considered essential in the management of surface water flows. This also applies to the phasing of the development and the need to minimise the risk of overland flooding to the development and surrounding areas.

The details outlined above show how some of the mitigation measures have been proposed to minimise any possible impact of flooding. However, these mitigation measures are not fully exhaustive given that this is a significant development, which is likely to take 20 to 25 years to complete. Therefore further assessments regarding the impact of flooding and additional mitigation measures may be required throughout the duration of the development.

PPS25 requires that development does not worsen the flood risk to other properties. As previously stated, the development site falls mostly within Flood Zone 1, and therefore most of the proposed development is considered to be suitable for the site. However, as there is an area of Flood Zone 2 located towards the centre of the site, along with a possible narrow strip of flood Zone 3 located to the east of the site, along the River Rother and a small area in the vicinity of Highfield Lane. It should also be noted that the Flood Zone 3 area close to Highfield Lane previously represented storage ponds, which have now been backfilled. It is therefore argued that on account of the sites re contouring and back-filling as a result of the restoration proposals, it should be now classified as being within Flood Zone 2.

Adopting a Sequential approach, the proposed land use in the Flood Zone 2 & 3 areas is for the reservoir and associated green areas with no buildings to be erected. The residential and commercial buildings are to be developed in the north of the site, where ground levels are elevated above the fluvial flood risk zones. It is therefore considered the development passes the requirements of PPS25.

Impact on Flooding of adjacent Areas Within the Outline Surface Water Strategy Report details of the surface water drainage modelling and proposed indicative network have been submitted. The key aspects in assessing the impact of flooding of adjacent areas are considered to be:

• The reservoirs are designed based on a 1 in 100 year rainfall return period over a 72 hour duration with a 30% allowance for climate change. The reservoirs are designed to discharge into the River Rother at a restricted rate. • Flow velocities within open channels and the reservoir inflow structures will in general be limited 3 m/sec, minimising the risk of scouring and flooding to surrounding areas. • In general the contours of the restoration site are designed to fall towards the reservoirs within the Waverley site.

95 • Proposed diversion of the surface water drainage from the Advance Manufacturing Park (AMP) site from the existing Sheffield Airport sewer in Polar Way, Catcliffe and into the surface water drainage system before discharging into the reservoirs within the Waverley site. This will reduce the amount of surface water flows and provide more capacity within the existing drainage system.

Once the site is developed, the development drainage systems should drain directly to the reservoirs and then discharge into the River Rother at a controlled rate. This will have the effect of regulating flows within the river. The village of Catcliffe suffered from the June 2007 floods, the design of the surface water drainage system and attenuation of flows within the Waverley site should therefore minimise the risk of flooding to Catcliffe from surface water run off from the Waverley site, thereby improving the current situation in this area.

Environment Agency Response Based on the information contained in Outline Surface Water Strategy Report and the Flood Risk Assessment dated 06/10/09, the Environment Agency's response is as follows: • Ensure that areas of the site covered by Flood Zones 2 and 3 are developed with acceptable water compatible development only, as defined by Table D2 of PPS25. • Ensure finished floor levels are set at a minimum of 150 mm above finished ground levels. • Details of potential overland flood routes throughout the site, during each phase of the development; state that detailed flow routing plans will be provided, and the design approach for the development will co- ordinate the catchment areas for the piped and open surface water drainage network and the proposed flood routing catchment areas where practicable. Access and egress during a flood event will also need to be considered in conjunction with the flood routing plans, to ensure safe access and egress within and also to outside of the site. • The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority. • The piped drainage network and open watercourses will drain to the attenuation reservoirs. • The reservoirs will limit discharge to the River Rother at a maximum rate of 5 l/s/ha. • The open watercourses shall be designed for the 1 in 100 year return period (plus an allowance of 30% for climate change) and 600 mm freeboard. • The piped drainage network will be designed so that there is no flooding during a 1 in 30 year storm.

96 • The maximum velocity within the open watercourses shall be a maximum of 3m/s, unless otherwise agreed by the Environment Agency. • SUDS will be incorporated into the surface water drainage scheme within the site. • Plans to show the catchment areas for surface water runoff within the site and surrounding areas, for each phase of the development (to ensure that there is adequate capacity for discharge of surface water runoff within each section of the drainage system, during and after completion of the development). • Details of how the current restoration drainage will fit within the proposed development drainage plans and the Masterplan, in particular Handsworth Beck and drainage channels C and C2. • Details of how the scheme shall be maintained and managed during and after completion of the development such that regular monitoring and maintenance of the watercourses and reservoirs will be required to ensure adequate capacity is provided within the site’s drainage system. This should also include details of satisfactory easement strips along the piped network and open watercourses, to allow access for maintenance.

The above measures and information should reduce the impact of flooding on the proposed development and future occupants, and ensure safe access and egress from the site. Although the Environment Agency are satisfied at this stage that the proposed development could be allowed in principle, the applicant will need to provide further information relating to the proposals to an acceptable standard to ensure that the proposed development can go ahead without posing an unacceptable flood risk.

Surface Water Drainage The Outline Surface Water Strategy Report provides details of the surface water drainage modelling and proposed indicative network. The key aspects in assessing the surface water drainage are considered to be as follows:

• Volume of the reservoirs are designed based on a 1 in 100 year rainfall return period over a 72 hour duration with a 20% allowance for climate change. The reservoirs are designed to discharge into the River Rother at a restricted rate. • All sewers will be designed to the latest version of Sewers for Adoption, presently designed to a 1 in 30 year event. Sewers to discharge to drainage channels before discharging to the reservoirs. • Velocities in open channels and at the reservoir inflow structures will in general be limited to maximum 3m/second. This will be achieved by the introduction of the following: - • Changes in direction of flows or the introduction of meanders • Cascades of varying forms, particularly at road crossings and sewer discharge points.

97 • Rock rakes. • Rough bed channels and rip rap. • Development surface water drainage systems should be offered to the Water Company for adoption. • Restoration drainage should drain to existing surface water drainage systems situated within the site and discharge to the reservoirs. • Further details showing the catchment areas for surface water runoff within the site and surrounding areas, for each phase of the development are required. This will ensure that there is adequate capacity for discharge of surface water runoff within each section of the drainage system, during and after completion of the development. • Further details of upstream section of Handsworth Beck are required to ensure that the position of the Beck does not compromise the development layout. • Flood routing for all surface water drainage system must be carried out to ensure that there is minimal risk to properties and surrounding land.

In order to ensure the delivery of the key aspects above, details of surface water drainage should be designed and approved during the duration of the development. Plans and details of the drainage channel capacities will therefore be provided so that all discharges from the development can be carefully monitored and approved as the site is developed which is likely to take 20 to 25 years to complete. A condition to this effect will be placed on any approval of planning consent.

Foul Water Very little details of the foul water drainage have been provided for the development and the restoration site does not require any provision for foul drainage.

The foul drainage serving the existing development within the Waverley site (AMP) is pumped and discharges to Yorkshire Water Sewage Treatment Works at Blackburn Meadows, Sheffield. The applicant is presently in discussion with Yorkshire Water to discharge all foul water drainage from the development by gravity via a transfer sewer to Woodhouse Mill Sewage Treatment Works, however this plant is currently full to capacity. In order to address this existing problem, it is likely that refurbishment works will be required at Woodhouse Mill Sewage Treatment Works, therefore before the works can receive foul drainage from the Waverley development, improvement works need to be carried out. Until this time foul drainage will be pumped and discharged to Blackburn Meadows.

Further details are required from the developer at detailed design stage to determine and approve all proposed foul drainage serving the Waverley development prior to the commencement of any development on site and a condition to this effect will be placed on any approval of planning consent.

Conclusion

98 The drainage assessment considers the suitability of the site for restoration and residential use associated with the development of the Waverley site. The foul, surface water drainage and land drainage serving the Waverley site has been approved in principle, but there are issues which must be addressed by Harworth Estates and any future developer before and during the development of the site, especially when it is likely that the site will take 20 to 25 years to complete.

The main issues that require further details and confirmation at detailed design stage include the following:

• Details showing the catchment areas for surface water runoff within the site and surrounding areas, for each phase of the development are required. • Details of upstream section of Handsworth Beck are required to ensure that the position of the Beck does not compromise the development layout. • Flood routing for all surface water drainage system must be carried out to ensure that there is minimal risk to properties and surrounding land. • Details of how the current restoration drainage will fit within the proposed development drainage plans and the Masterplan, in particular Handsworth Beck and drainage channels C and C2. • Details of how the drainage systems shall be maintained and managed during and after completion of the development such that regular monitoring and maintenance of the watercourses and reservoirs will be required to ensure adequate capacity is provided within the site’s drainage system. This should also include details of satisfactory maintenance strips along the piped network and open watercourses, to allow access for maintenance and in emergencies. • Drainage channel capacities must not be exceeded and velocities in general must not exceed 3 m/second.

It is considered that the above can be guaranteed through the imposition of conditions should planning permission be granted at this outline stage.

Urban Design and Scale

Policy Background UDP Policy ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ aims to achieve environmental improvements through an appropriate standard of design, layout and landscaping

UDP Policy T6 ‘Location and Layout of Development’ discourages development which causes traffic congestion and promote safe and convenient access for pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities.

Planning Policy Statement 1: ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ encourages strong, vibrant and sustainable communities; protection and enhancement of the environment; prudent use of natural resources; and sustainable economic development.

99

PPS3 ‘Housing’ encourages the creation of mixed communities with a variety of housing in terms of tenure, price and households. Efficient use of land is also a key consideration and 30 dwellings per hectare net should be used as a national indicative minimum. Careful attention to design is fundamental to using land efficiently.

Background A number of indicative masterplans showing a new community have been prepared since the start of UK Coal’s plans to restore the site. However following the submission of this planning application in August 2008, the Framework Plan has been revised through a series of monthly workshops with Officers from RMBC and SCC as well as the RMBC Design Panel and following CABE’s review of the proposals. In an attempt to address all initial concerns, changes to the plan were made, which include variations to the overall grid pattern, modifications to the transport interchange, the introduction of a mixed use zone, the location of Orgreave Square, the route of Highfield Lane and clearer definition of character areas.

Indicative Framework Plan and Design and Access Statement An indicative Framework Plan has been submitted to show how the site could be developed and provide the Local Authority with information that the quantum of development can be accommodated on the site satisfactorily. The Framework Plan is indicative only and subsequent applications on this site will not be tied into this layout.

The application is also accompanied by a Design and Access Statement in accordance with the requirements set out in Circular 01/2006. One of the key roles of this document is to serve as a common source of information and guidance for all those involved in the future development of Waverley New Community.

The applicant has split the site into six different character areas each with their own distinct qualities. The six built character areas are described in the Design and Access Statement as follows:

1) ‘Central Bastide - central part of the community, located to the south of Highfield Lane and Highwall Park with views towards Waverley Hill. In close proximity to facilities located in both Orgreave Square and the Waterfront.

• (A Bastide is the name given to the ancient European form of fortified new towns, the central core of which remain in many places in France and Italy in the form of a grid pattern around a central square).

2) Mixed-use centre - mixed use development wrapping around the transport interchange comprising Orgreave Square and the mixed-use link to Highfield Commercial.

100 3) Catcliffe Gate - early phase linking to the existing community of Catcliffe. Defines the new character and traffic calming approach. This character area forms part of the first phase of development.

4) Riverside and The Point - with the exception of Waverley Point, a slightly lower density area between the River Rother and Highwall Park. Urban blocks ranging in density from 37 to 57 dwellings per hectare. Waverley Point is located towards the south eastern end of the Riverside. There are no height restrictions caused by surface mining and so a small cluster of higher apartments is proposed.

5) The Waterfront - high density development fronting the lakes, with views across Waverley Park. This area forms the recreational heart of the community with a variety of uses located along the water’s edge, including food and drink, retail and leisure facilities. Residential uses are typically located in the upper floors.

6) Highfield Spring - central part of the community, located to the north of Highfield Lane and including the second primary school. Also comprises the southern edge of the new community that is characterised by its proximity to Handsworth and with views towards Waverley Hill.

There are a further two un-built character areas. These comprise:

1) Transport Interchange – The transport interchange is a key area between the town centre, Highfield Commercial, Catcliffe Gate and Highfield Lane. It is an early phase but will probably follow some three years after the start of housebuilding.

2) Highwall Park - This is the main public park for the new community, and will be an important facility for new residents as they move in. It contains a wide range of recreational facilities and abuts the first phase primary school.’

Taking each character area in turn, a description and assessment is provided below:

Central Bastide The applicant’s describe this area as the tight urban core of the new settlement and it is intended to be the heart of an original gridded town, forming the densest part of the development. Generally, the bastide is separated from the other character areas, but is well connected to them. It is bounded to the northeast, northwest and southeast by open space, which emphasises its character as a semi walled town. It is crossed by Highfield Lane, which is to be re-instated as a calmed 30 mph route.

This area will accommodate medium to high density (55 to 75 dwellings per hectare) housing numbers appropriate to town centres. It is likely that terraced town houses and apartments will be the most appropriate form of

101 residential development to provide for the densities required. The proposals suggest that 20% of all residential properties in the development will be apartments; it is likely that a large proportion of these will be located in this area, akin to various town centre developments. The density, whilst high in this area is considered to be acceptable due to the overall character of the area.

Central to the character of this area is the water street, containing the drainage channel, which separates the area down the middle. This street runs from the realigned Highfield Lane down to the Urban Waterfront and creates an opportunity for landscaping whilst also providing ecological opportunities. It is anticipated that this street will be approximately 25 – 28 metres in width and the use of shared surfaces will be common which in turn will restrict traffic speed to a maximum of 20mph. High quality open space is also anticipated with architectural elements placed along the drainage channel such as wooden decks and pedestrian bridges to connect both sides for pedestrians. Detailed design of the drainage channel will ensure that it is attractive whether wet or dry.

Mixed Use Centre The mixed use centre forms the main connection between Orgreave Square, Highfield Commercial / Helical Governetz and the transport hub. It is therefore envisaged to be the busiest part of the new community and the principal commercial thoroughfare. At its southern end, and a block away from the re- aligned Highfield Lane, is the central town square (Orgreave Square), which provides all the day-to-day needs of the community in terms of retail and community uses. The square is 10 minutes walk from all parts of the new community and south of both the transport hub and Highfield Commercial. Uses within this area include the health centre, library, community centre, restaurants and the food store. The success of this area will be dependant upon the commercial market at any given time, however the delivery of community uses will be tied into the S106 Legal Agreement and therefore guaranteed to be provided.

In addition to Orgreave Square, the design of the link allows between 400 and 2000 sqm of commercial, employment or hybrid uses, such as workshops and live/work units, on the ground floor with residential above, however clearly this will be commercially driven at the time of development.

The street is shown as being approximately 25 metres wide with two shared surface roads located either side of a central sustainable urban drainage feature lined by trees, and front access to commercial premises. The street is lined by 3 to 4 storey blocks which allow 3 storey town houses above other uses in the ground floor plinth which can take a range of uses over time, but can also revert to residential.

This area also forms part of the boundary with the proposed Helical Governetz development; therefore it creates a prominent frontage and the link between the two developments. This boundary will have an optimum width of 24 metres and be designed as a tree lined boulevard. Residential properties

102 fronting onto this are expected to be between 3 and 4 storeys with 2 metre front gardens.

Catcliffe Gate This area is shown on the Phasing Parameter Plan as an early phase of development between Catcliffe and the transport hub area. The site is well located close to Catcliffe recreation ground, the River Rother and Highwall Park, all of which are within 5 minutes walk. There are key frontages overlooking the Catcliffe open space on Poplar Way, Highfield Lane and the bridleway adjacent to the transport hub, as well as the River Rother. Central to this area is a small transitional square with possible mixed uses where Highfield Lane crosses an open space corridor linking Highwall Park with Catcliffe.

The principal street network comprises the northern half of Highfield Lane which will be a 6 metre street allowing bus routes. Principal edges to the outside open spaces, Highfield Lane and major internal spaces are the most important parts for coding, which is considered in more detail later in the report.

The densities in this area will be lower than the areas described in the character areas above, being predominately medium to low (55 to 35 dwellings per hectare), with higher density at the entrance gateway on Highfield Lane. The buildings are anticipated to be up to 3 storeys in height, providing a strong urban character.

Riverside and the Point This area forms part of both phase two and three of the development between the River Rother and Highwall Park. There are key frontages overlooking Highwall Park, the lakes, and the river. The area north of Highwall Park has not been surface mined, and thus consideration can be given at detailed design stage to basement or undercroft parking and higher buildings. The sketches in the applicant’s Design and Access Statement show apartment and house developments up to six storeys in height with a possible landmark block up to ten storeys (Waverley Point). Under the apartment buildings a reasonable amount of mixed use development (food & drink outlets and commercial leisure) should be considered.

Waverley Point is shown as a ten storey apartment block. It is surrounded on two sides by open space and to the south by the urban beach and lakes beyond. It forms part of the third phase of development and whilst it is currently shown as an apartment block at this stage of the proposals, when detailed design of this area is considered it may form something completely different, as this is an area where there are very few geo-technical constraints.

103 Urban Waterfont The applicant’s describe this as the most important character area after the Mixed Use Link, because it is a mixed use area overlooking 26 hectares (65 acres) of water, set in a vast amount of parkland. The vision for the urban waterfront is recreation, leisure and residential based with cafés and restaurants spilling out onto a hard landscape comparative to a continental lakeside experience.

The lakes present an opportunity to create an urban realm which differs to that of the remainder of the development, as well as an opportunity for recreation and leisure. A mix of uses and higher densities can be accommodated along the waterfront. Restaurants, cafés, bars and retailing which provide both lunchtime and evening economy. The promenade along the lakes is shown with adequate width to allow for outdoor dining, pavement shop displays, walkers, cyclists, space for people to sit, as well as allowing for occasional uses such as markets and community events. A full range of housing types is expected in this area, including forms of undercroft parking along the waterfront. The buildings are expected to reach 4 storeys in height and provision will be made for extensive soft landscaping.

The scale of development and range of uses is considered to be acceptable given the location of this character area. The provision for undercroft parking is welcomed, as it will ensure that the buildings and landscaping will provide the dominant feature as opposed to large open car parks.

Highfield Spring The character of this area is clearly bounded by the Sheffield to Worksop railway line to the south and Highfield Lane to the east, the town centre mixed use area to the north, and Highfield Commercial to the north. At its heart is the second primary school and a small local park, which may form the focus of the local community in the later stages of the development.

The Highfield Spring corridors will be planted up, as will the line of the proposed Link Road and the edge of the railway line. In addition the area will benefit from the landscapes of Waverley hill and the Green Belt land beyond the railway, thereby creating a very green development area of low to medium density (35 to 55 dwellings per hectare).

This area forms part of the final phase of development and is heavily constrained by existing and proposed infrastructure. Despite this, the low to medium densities will ensure that a significant amount of land is available for landscaping and its proximity to Orgreave Square and the mixed use centre will ensure that this area is well connected to a range of facilities.

Transport Hub The transport interchange consists of two interconnected parts: the Park & Ride car park for 1000 cars; and the adjacent public transport interchange area. The latter is sited close to the facilities of the urban centre and is designed to integrate with the adjacent housing areas. It is currently shown as unfenced and has been designed to link well with pedestrian desire lines both

104 to the urban centre and to the early phase of Catcliffe Gate. Due to the location of this facility, only one small part of the entire masterplan is more than a 10 minute walk from this central transport hub.

It is acknowledged that the Transport Interchange and Park and Ride do not form part of the new community proposals, however consideration has to be given to whether the integration of the facility with adjacent residential properties is achievable. For this reason indicative sketches and information was requested for scrutiny in the Revised Design and Access Statement. In this regard it is considered that the two uses can be accommodated in close proximity subject to extensive landscaping proposals and a clever use of design.

The physical arrangements allow space for 6 buses, in addition to the proposed Bus Rapid Transit services to both Rotherham and Sheffield centres, and local services serving the surrounding villages and the new community itself. It is also shown to contain canopies for passengers and a waiting cafe, retail and ticketing building. It is served both from Highfield Commercial to the north and Highfield Lane to the south.

Highwall Park The Design and Access Statement describes Highwall Park as forming the ‘green spine’ of the new community covering an area of approximately 12ha. The linear form is dictated by the development constraints imposed by historic mining activities and the formation of the ‘high wall’.

The design of this area has focused on the interaction with water, the use of natural materials and the diversity of plants and habitats. The linear flow of the park is broken up by a sequence of spaces along the western ‘urban’ edge, comprising seating galleries/ terraces and footpaths which extend across the park in an east-west direction connecting development on each side. The main equipped play areas sit within the lower lying and flatter land to the east of the watercourse. Strong planting forms are shown to define the edges to the park and help soften the hard urban fringe.

The park will form part of the strategic green network connecting the new community with the Green Belt, the extensive open spaces of Waverley Park and the existing settlements which surround the new community. It is hoped that it will facilitate and encourage sustainable modes of travel through a series of connected footpaths, cyclepaths and bridleways. These will extend beyond the park and serve the residential and employment areas of the new community and beyond. The proposed landscape within the park will incorporate native planting including traditional parkland trees, grassland and watercourses, will link in to existing wildlife corridors which proliferate along the Rother valley.

Formal play areas and sporting facilities are located at the northern end of the park and include equipped play areas, a multi-use games area and youth shelters. Elsewhere informal play will be encouraged through interaction with

105 natural and man-made elements including water, boulders, sculpture and landform.

Design Codes In order to control the detailed design of the new community, the use of design codes will be used. CABE advocate their use in some instance and state:

‘The concept of an urban design code starts from the proposition that the design of a new development can be planned and regulated to achieve a higher quality outcome. It introduces an increased level of design control in an attempt to exert greater assurance over the quality of the product.’

For the purposes of the phasing, the site has been spilt into four major zones which will define the coverage of the design codes (approximately 1,000 dwellings in each). Prior to the submission of the first Reserved Matters application in each phase of development, the Design Code will need to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This will ensure that all subsequent Reserved Matters applications in that phase of development will have to have regard to the approved Design Code, unless extenuating circumstances dictate otherwise.

Each Design Code will include information relating to the following:

• Character Areas • Advanced Structure Planting • Semi Mature Tree Planting • Street Tree Planting • Street Types and Street Materials • Block types and uses • Building Heights • Density • Boundary Treatments • Landscape Treatments • Feature Spaces (including squares, parks and play areas) • Architectural and Sustainable Construction Principles • Relationship between proposed Landscape and Built Form • Security Principles • Sustainability / Energy

The Design Code for each geographical phase shall also include:

• Details of code testing undertaken prior to finalisation; and • Proposals for monitoring and review

Phase 1

106 No Design Codes were submitted as part of this Outline application, therefore in an attempt to provide an interim position, the applicant was required to provide greater clarity and detail on Phase One of the development.

The original intention was that this detailed design area should directly correspond to Phase One as outlined on the Phasing Parameter Plan, however due to its importance and following discussions between Officers and Harworth Estates, this now includes Phase One and all development fronting the re-aligned Highfield Lane, as well as the interface with Highfield Commercial / Helical Governetz. Accordingly this more detailed information now includes all or part of all 6 character areas as follows: • All of Catcliffe Gate • All of the Transport Hub • All of the Mixed Use Centre • The top of Highwall Park • Part of the Central Bastide • Part of Highfield Spring

It should however be noted that the phase one detailed design is indicative only and further information will be submitted as part of the Design Code for each Character Area.

Within the Design and Access Statement, an indicative plan is provided showing the extent of this area and how it could be built out, providing greater detail of building blocks, the use of landscaping and road layout. It also provides sample blocks, which illustrate how a block could be developed according to its density.

The content and detail contained within this chapter of the Design and Access Statement is considered to be acceptable and sets out the principles and parameters in which the detailed Design Code should be based upon. Each sample block provides adequate and acceptable information relating to building heights, road layout, car parking ratios and street greening to provide the Local Authority with the level of comfort required to ensure that subsequent Design Codes will guarantee an increased level of design is protected.

Conclusion The indicative Framework Plan and Design and Access Statement (DAS) have set out the constraints and opportunities for future development of the site. It is clear from the content of the DAS that the indicative framework plan has been design led and reflects the original concerns from CABE which mainly related to the tight grid pattern and location and number of local centres.

The indicative Framework Plan demonstrates that the quantum of development can be satisfactorily accommodated on site, whilst protecting the important design principles. The use of Design Codes will ensure that a high quality development will be created whilst at the same time providing the facilities needed for a new community. The use of undercroft parking in the

107 areas close to the Waterfront is welcomed and will be encouraged at detailed design stage, likewise the use of urban water streets and open drainage channels, which will provide opportunities for biodiversity gain.

Overall, it is considered that the proposed development has been well thought out and will significantly improve the appearance of this area in accordance with UDP Policies 3.1 and T6 and National Policies PPS1 and PPS3.

Green infrastructure , Open Space and Recreation

Policy Background UDP Policy T7 ‘Public Rights of Way’ safeguard, maintain, promote and where appropriate create footpaths cycleways and bridleways.

Supplementary Planning Guidance 4 ‘Requirements for Greenspace in new Housing Areas’ states that ‘The Council will expect the provision of adequate Greenspace within new large housing developments so as to help meet the extra demand which its residents generate. Greenspace in the residential context may take the form of amenity open space, child playspace and more formal open space including playing fields. In ensuring that adequate provision is made, regard will be given to the location of the new development and to the following standards:

1. Developments of more than 100 family houses should normally provide 60 square metres of greenspace per dwelling (1.6ha per 1000 population).’

The Rotherham Play Strategy 2007 – 2012 addresses the play needs of children and young people in Rotherham up to 19 years of age. The strategy aims to be inclusive and covers fixed play facilities, green spaces and staffed services such as supervised play facilities including out of school clubs.

The Rotherham Playing Pitch Strategy 2009 which presents a strategic framework for the development of playing pitches with community access across Rotherham.

Regional Spatial Strategy Policy YH8 requires that areas and networks of green infrastructure will be identified, protected, created, extended, enhanced, managed and maintained … to ensure that improved, accessible and healthy environments are available for the benefits of present and future communities.

Regional Spatial Strategy Policy ENV11 advocates maximising opportunities to develop walking and cycling routes and other green infrastructure and safeguarding and enhancing high quality facilities for sports and recreation.

PPS17 ‘Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation’ states that Local Authorities should ensure that provision is made for local sports and recreational facilities where planning permission is granted for new developments.

108 The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 placed a duty on Local Authorities to consider Crime and Community Safety when making planning decisions.

DETR Circular 5/94 ‘Planning out Crime’ clearly states that crime prevention is a material consideration in the planning process. Providing facilities for young people to reduce crime and improve community safety are clearly issues that must be considered.

Informal Open Space and Allotments Due to the sheer scale of the proposed development and its relationship with the outlying villages of Catcliffe, Treeton, Orgreave and Handsworth, the provision of informal open space and recreational facilities is considered to be essential in order to create a well planned sustainable community.

Within the Design and Access Statement, the applicant has provided information relating to how the need for informal space can be met on site. This demonstrates that the proposed park to the south of development comprises an area of 88.6ha of open space and 24.6ha of lakes. Both of these are located within the Green Belt as defined on the UDP Proposals Plan. By opening up this area it will link with the existing communities at a very early stage of the development, providing access to the lakes and the Rights of Way network approved as part of the restoration proposals. Key elements of the long term landscape structure include native woodland, wetland and drainage channels, open grassland and wildflower meadows, as well as the aforementioned network of footpaths, cycleways and bridleway.

The applicant’s are proposing that the long term management and maintenance of Waverley Park will be funded by the Management Company. Concerns have been raised that the restoration/landscaping/future management and maintenance scheme for this has not yet been submitted to discharge the condition relating to the restoration proposals. An outline of management objectives has been requested but not received to date. The standards for management and maintenance of Waverley Park are therefore currently unknown. Despite this, the requirement of the restoration proposals only require the landowner to maintain the site for 5 years following the submission and approval of the maintenance scheme, therefore following that date the site would become an open green site which will encourage biodiversity and habitat creation.

The maintenance and management of the Waverley Park following on from this 5 year period and other new areas of public realm within the site is of great importance in securing an acceptable environment for residents, workers and visitors. The applicants have proposed that a Management Company take over the management and maintenance of open spaces in the area. The detail of this proposed framework will however need to be discussed and agreed with the LPA before any development commences.

The principles and parameters for this Site Management Plan will need to include an appropriate combination of management arrangements ranging from details of standards of maintenance to the safeguards to be put in place

109 for the encouragement of biodiversity and habitat creation. Details pertaining to the repair and replacement of street furniture in unadopted areas will also need to be included, however it will be for the management company and/or Harworth Estates to satisfy the LPA that its proposed arrangements in the Site Management Plan are acceptable and robust as a long term framework for the future of the development and its public realm before the submission of any reserved matters application for Phase 1 or any other phase of the development. This will ensure that the design of the development proceeds on the basis of a clear understanding as to the future principles and responsibility for achieving high quality management of all public realm areas and facilities.

In addition to the Waverley Park, a need for allotments on the site has been demonstrated. A site has therefore been reserved to the north east of the River Rother for this purpose. Space has been provided for 30 allotments with expansion space for an additional 12 if required in the future. Toilet and storage facilities will also be provided. It is envisaged that the future management of these will be provided by the proposed Management Company who will also maintain other unadopted facilities and services.

Access to the proposed allotment site is somewhat limited and is only gained via an existing bridge across the River. A structural report has been completed on this and a requirement to upgrade it to be DDA compliant is a requirement of the S106 Legal Agreement. This is not an ideal situation; however it was deemed that the benefit of having some allotment provision on site outweighed the fact that the access is not ideal. Car parking provision for this facility is envisaged to be located at the foot of the bridge, however this will be addressed fully at detailed design stage.

Formal Open Space, Sport Facilities and Children’s Play The Council has adopted the standard recommendation by the National Playing Fields Association (NPFA) for assessing the provision outdoor playing space. Where the opportunity exists, it will seek to secure provision above the minimum standard. The NPFA defines outdoor playing space as ‘space which is available for sport, active recreation or children’s play space which is of suitable size and nature for its intended purpose and safely accessible and available to the general public.’ The NPFA recommend that the overall minimum standard of 2.43ha per 1000 population is met by a combination of two types of playing space as set out below:

• The first is 1.6ha of space for formal sport for youth and adult use which comprises pitches, greens courts, athletic facilities and pitch and putt golf courses which are available for use to local people. Included within this figure is a specific allocation standard of 1.2ha for pitch sports.

• The second category is children’s playing space, for which the standard is 0.8ha. This includes equipped playgrounds and casual play space within housing areas, which should meet the needs of children of different ages.

110 The provision of formal equipped play across the site as set out in the Design and Access Statement includes the following:

• Neighbourhood Equipped Area for Play (NEAP) x 1 (Total area - 8,400sqm) • Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP) x 3 (Total area – 10,800sqm) • Local Area for Play (LAP) x 7 (Total area – 2,800sqm) • Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) x 1 (Total area – 1,225sqm) • Pocket Parks x 8 (Total area – 19,680sqm) • Highwall Park (Total area - 114,680sqm) • School Grounds including Junior Pitches x 2 (Total area - 16,800sqm)

This total area equates to approximately 17.4ha of formal equipped play provision on the site. Based on the 2001 census data of 2.3 people per household and adopting the NPFA standards set out above, a requirement for 21.8ha is required split between formal sport and children’s playing space. The 17.4ha therefore falls short of this requirement by 4.4ha, however due to the topography of the site, it was difficult to provide adult play pitches on site. As an alternative to this, a financial contribution towards the improvement of 6 adult sports pitches in Handsworth, Woodhouse Mill and Treeton will be secured through the S106 Legal Agreement. The overall area of these pitches based on an average pitch size of 100m x 90m equates to 5.4ha, thereby exceeding the NPFA standards by 1ha. The improvement of these existing facilities will also ensure that the pitches are more widely accessible and used by existing and future residents.

The choice of play provision requested at Waverely was discussed in great depth and was based on the findings of the Rotherham Play Strategy 2007- 2012, the Rotherham Playing Pitch Strategy 2009 and the draft Rotherham Green Spaces Strategy. These documents assisted in identifying the need for provision of neighbourhood parks within a 15 minute walk of all dwellings and a demand for Multi Use Games Areas in this specific location. In addition, and based upon Sport England’s Team Generation Rates, which are calculated upon the number of population to be created by the new development, this identified a need for improvements to football pitches in the immediate locality to meet this increased demand.

In addition to the above, two Youth Shelters are proposed within the site. Indicatively these are shown to be located within Highwall Park and close to school two, however this will not be determined until detailed design stage. The inclusion of these facilities is considered to assist in the reduction of youth nuisance at other recreation sites and elsewhere in the community in accordance with Circular 5/94 ‘Planning out Crime’.

The Design and Access Statement shows where the above facilities can be provided on site such that all new homes are located not more than five minutes walking distance from a local green space and fifteen minutes walk from a neighbourhood greenspace. Pocket parks are likely to be distributed across the site in each character area and are designed to be at least 0.2ha in size and offer a range of facilities including play provision and seating

111 although the exact location and design of each of these will be subject to the detailed design stage.

Sport England have confirmed that a planned approach to the provision of facilities and opportunities for sport is necessary in order to ensure the sport and recreational needs of local communities are met. They note Rotherham’s Playing Pitch Strategy 2009 has the following recommendation which Sport England welcomes and would encourage the Council to adopt:

‘Ensure playing pitch and public access requirements are addressed at the initial stages of any future residential and educational developments in line with proposed quantitative and qualitative standards and hierarchy priorities.’

They acknowledge that this is an outline application and there are some issues that are yet to be addressed such as ground condition surveys, however they withdraw their original objections to the proposals subject to adequate phased delivery of facilities and the need for all new sports provision being designed to Sport England’s standards.

Street Greening A key consideration for the success of this development is to ensure that the site is well landscaped and does not present a large baron area of built development. Information contained within the Design and Access Statement (DAS) identifies a variety of tree species suitable for street greening, public squares and boundary planting. The DAS also illustrates a number of typical cross sections outlining how streets in various character areas could be constructed including provision for street planting.

Concerns have been raised by RMBC Officers regarding the lack of space for the provision of street planting. In this respect significant discussions were held to establish the required space for the planting of trees adjacent to a highway. In the first instance RMBC’s guidelines state that trees should be a minimum of 2 metres from the highway and 2 metres from any building (dependant upon species) to avoid overshadowing and potential hazards in the highway.

The typical cross sections within the DAS do not provide for this quantum of space as it was deemed that by providing it, it would encourage overly wide streets, to the detriment of the urban design of the development. Instead trees are shown within front garden areas of residential properties, along the drainage channel and in set backs in the highway and public footpaths. These clearly do not meet RMBC’s standards as set out above and concerns regarding the undue reliance on the resolution of this issue at reserved matters stage are acknowledged. However the typical cross sections do provide for some flexibility in terms of widths that can be discussed in more detail at the detailed design code stage and precedents of where successful street planting in confined spaces has been presented by the applicant in other locations in the UK.

112 It is therefore considered that the key to the success of street greening at Waverley will lie with the right choice of tree species in the right location. Taller more columnar trees will be preferred within the street scene adjacent to a public highway, whilst larger tree types will be chosen in the public squares where space is more abundant.

Rights of Way Network The Waverley Rights of Way and Public Access Proposed Action Plan 2007 has been prepared to enable the re-instatement of the rights of way network and the creation of a new network of footpaths, cycleways and bridleways across the site. The Action Plan has been prepared using a partnership approach between RMBC and UK Coal with extensive input from local ramblers and communities to guide the restoration scheme following opencast coaling and reclamation works.

Within the Design and Access Statement these rights of way are identified on a plan (page 54), however no reference is made to the aforementioned Rights of Way and Public Access Action Plan. In order therefore to ensure that the Rights of Way network is delivered in accordance with the diagram in the Design and Access Statement and the Action Plan, the provision of a comprehensive Rights of Way, Cycleway and Bridleway network should be conditioned by any grant of planning permission.

Concerns have been raised that sufficient space may not be made available for the bridleway where it passes the proposed public transport interchange, through the Highfield Commercial site. Consideration therefore needs to be given to the detailed design of these proposals at the relevant time when the reserved matters and full applications are submitted and considered. Due to the nature of both of these applications, assurance needs to be given that there is no conflict between car drivers and bridleway users. The creation of a welcoming environment for the bridleway will be essential to its success and to encourage people to use it.

Conclusion The proposed development will result in a population of approximately 9,000 people, which in turn will increase demand for sports provision and use of greenspaces in this area. It is considered that the applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that they can meet the NPFA standards in relation to formal sports provision, children’s play and greenspace on and adjacent to the application site.

The provision of sufficient space for street tree planting has caused much debate, however it is considered that flexibility has been built into the widths of the typical street sections shown in the DAS to address this issue at detailed design code stage. Furthermore, the choice of tree type could prevent any overhanging of trees in the highway. Careful consideration is therefore required when considering the design code for each phase of development.

113 A comprehensive bridleway, footpath and cycle network is proposed, providing clear direct routes around the site and to the outlying villages.

Ecology, Biodiversity and Management

Policy Background UDP Policy ENV2.4 ‘Enhancing Environmental Resources’ supports the positive promotion and enhancement of the boroughs environmental resources through measures such as…countryside management schemes… creative conservation and site interpretation…

UDP Policy ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’ stresses the importance of maintaining and enhancing the landscape of the borough.

Rotherham Local Biodiversity Action Plan. The Local Biodiversity Action Plan sets out a framework for nature conservation. This framework includes priority species/habitats and sets targets which will guide work to maintain and enhance their conservation status. The plan contains a list of plants and animals of conservation concern in Rotherham and associated districts.

The Regional Spatial Strategy to 2026 has biodiversity enhancement as one of the key spatial priorities as outlined in Policy YH1. Policy ENV8 also seeks to safeguard and enhance biodiversity.

Planning Policy Statement 9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation aims to ensure that development and regeneration should have minimal effects on biodiversity and should also add to geological conservation interests.

The Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended). This is the primary legislation for nature conservation in England and Wales. It confers varying degrees of protection on selected species according to their conservation status, ranging from making it an offence to take a species from the wild for profit, to full protection of a species and its habitat. Species are added or removed from the legislation from time to time, as their conservation status changes.

Ecological Impact The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement and a full Environmental Impact Assessment has been carried out. The report considers the key environmental impacts including the impact of development on ecological and biodiversity. In addition to the Ecology Assessment, the applicant has also submitted a Biodiversity Action Plan and an Ecological Management Strategy.

The Ecological Assessment describes those habitats and species present on and adjacent to site and assess the impacts on those habitats to be created through the restoration proposals. The baseline conditions relating to habitats and species have been identified through desktop surveys of national and local databases and from field surveys.

114

The field surveys have confirmed the presence of water vole in a section of the River Rother, and the presence of grass snake on the periphery of the existing site. In addition to this the presence on site of dingy skipper has been confirmed. Bird species assemblages were typical for the habitats available in the site and areas in the site have been identified as important for ground nesting birds such as skylark, meadow pipit and lapwing. The current land use of the site and the ongoing process of restoration has limited the site’s potential to support a wider range of species. As habitats develop within the footprint of the site then more species will colonise and other areas in the site will become ecologically viable and important.

The report has been scrutinized by the Council’s Ecology Development Officer who has confirmed that the survey and impact assessment methods used by the applicant are acceptable and the results are accepted whilst acknowledging that future monitoring programmes are required. The consideration of the likely future presence of protected species is welcome and ongoing management monitoring through the site Biodiversity Plan will enable establishment of actual species presence which may prove of use when considering impact of future development areas.

The future management of the conservation grassland which includes semi improved grassland, marshy grassland, Ephemeral / short perennial, dense continuous scrub, scattered scrub, broadleaved plantation, standing water and swamp is a key long term commitment and will have significant bearing on the success of the wider scheme. The Ecology Assessment states that these grassland areas will be fenced, hedged or ditched to prevent public ingress and that the existing and future grassland areas will be managed by a combination of grazing and hay cut. The desire to minimize public access in certain areas is welcome and will benefit a range of key species using the site.

The Ecological Management Strategy and Biodiversity Action Plan have been submitted to provide additional information. This document is currently in outline form and will be subject to further development and detail. It does however provide a useful audit of the nature conservation interest of the site and its implications for management and development. Once complete it should form the framework for long term future management including agreed aims and targets for the habitats and species present.

Mitigation Measures Mitigation is aimed at both construction measures which are regarded as short term and the long term management measures that will be implemented throughout and beyond the aftercare period.

Mitigation for the larger site was incorporated into the restoration design which was approved by Members in 2008. The overall approach is for a mixed use development that retains habitats and landscape features which are identified as important for wildlife. In the short and longer terms these habitats would remain in situ in the site thereby reducing the overall impacts of development.

115 In addition to this, mitigation proposals are offered with the aim of further reducing and / or negating the impacts of the proposed developments on resident wildlife and habitats. Mitigation in the present context relates to general site clearance work proposed for the development platforms and specifically to those species recorded on site and also those that have the potential to establish in the site.

The following mitigation measures are proposed by the applicant:

• Mitigation for water vole has been incorporated in to the design of the conservation lake, Lake 3. This has involved sympathetic planting of the lake edge and a lake edge design that facilitates the establishment of burrows by any water voles that may enter into the site.

• Conservation grasslands and woodland areas will be fenced or hedged off or ditches will be installed, planted or constructed to prevent ingress by members of the public. Increased access into these areas will be actively discouraged by the management company.

• Grazing stock will be removed during excessively wet periods and all stock will be removed from the grassland areas in January – February to allow establishment of grasses and herbs in preparation of the bird breeding season. Grass cut for fodder will be taken following cessation of the bird breeding season and grasses will not be cut before the end of July in any year.

• Scrub encroachment will be controlled in these areas and the ground surface will be broken up every three years using chain harrows to create an open sward. Similarly, for grass snake areas will be maintained that support a variable height in vegetation and basking areas will be retained through direct and appropriate management.

• The provision of bat boxes in trees on the site side of the river and incorporation of bat boxes and cavity refuges in new buildings will greatly enhance the biodiversity of the site. The locations for bat boxes and cavity refuges will be discussed in detail with future developers prior to building plots being developed.

• Where vegetation clearance cannot be undertaken outside the bird breeding season, it is confirmed that all such areas would be subject to a thorough walkover survey by a suitably qualified ecologist prior to any clearance or disturbance work being undertaken. It is proposed that such vegetation clearance would be carried out in sections and only further to the ecologist having undertaken a survey of the relevant area and confirmed that such works can proceed.

• No vegetation removal would be carried out within a 10m radius of a bird nest unless a different standoff distance is specified by the ecologist.

116 • Transects will be established along the route of all in-site roadways and other areas to be disturbed to search for the presence of ground nesting birds.

• Mitigation for reptiles and common amphibian species will include their removal and translocation in accordance with nationally recognised methods prior to the onset of construction.

• Mitigation for invertebrate species will include additional survey for species as habitats develop in the site.

Conclusion The ecological impact of development has been examined by the applicant. They have concluded that the implementation of proposed mitigation measures coupled with the enhancement of retained habitats will facilitate the achievement of neutral impacts overall in the short term with major beneficial impacts gained in the longer term.

The Council’s Ecologist agrees with the broad assumptions and subject to an ongoing review of species and habitat on the site does not raise any objections. The proposals are therefore considered to be in accordance with UDP Policies ENV2.4 and ENV3, RSS Policy ENV8 as well as National Planning Policy Statement 9.

Geo-technical Constraints and Contamination

Policy Background UDP Policy ENV4.3 ‘Unstable Land’ states that developments will need to demonstrate that any potential for ground instability has been investigated and where appropriate, remedial steps should be incorporated into schemes which are being promoted.

UDP Policy ENV4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’ requires the applicant to undertake contamination surveys and recommend measures to treat / remove any contamination identified on land which may be contaminated by previous industrial uses.

Planning Policy Guidance 14 ‘Development on Unstable Land’ states that ‘applications on land which is known or suspected unstable or potentially unstable will need to take account of the potential hazard that such instability could create both to the development itself and to the neighbouring area …. it is important that a local planning authority should be satisfied by the developer that instability has been taken into account’.

Planning Policy Statement 23 ‘Planning and Pollution Control’ states that ‘In considering proposals for development, (Local Authorities) should take account of the risks of and from pollution and land contamination and how these can be managed or reduced’.

117 Background As previously stated, the majority of the site was part of the Orgreave Opencast mine which excavated seams down a depth of 40m to 60m in the south and west, increasing down the dip of the strata to about 90m in the north and east of the site. However the north eastern boundary of the opencast site, which runs some 100m to 150m south west of the River Rother (apart from the northern extremity where it is at a distance of about 300m) was excavated into natural rock and therefore a ‘high wall’ up to 90m in height was formed running the length of the site.

The opencast void was backfilled with overburden excavated from the site together with material from the former Orgreave Colliery spoil tip as part of the restoration programme.

In addition to removing all the contamination over the opencasted area, significant areas of contamination were removed in the area between the ‘high wall’ and the River Rother. This area was then backfilled and raised by the placement of backfill that was properly engineered by compaction in layers.

Land Stability As a result of the site’s history and in accordance with PPG14, the applicant has submitted some details regarding the stability of the site, acknowledging that this was dealt with in more detail during the restoration proposals when development platforms were considered and subsequently created.

One of the most significant constraints to the future development of this site is potential deformation of the opencast backfill. However, in recognition of this problem, UK Coal as part of the restoration proposals surcharged all the areas where development is planned over opencast backfill. Based upon the evidence of the adjoining Helical Governetz site and much research undertaken by the Building Research Establishment (BRE) it is concluded by the applicant that this work will have limited settlements to magnitudes that can be tolerated by the proposed structures.

There is currently an extensive testing and monitoring programme underway to confirm the magnitude of settlement that can be expected during development and this data will be used to inform foundation design at the detailed design stage. This programme of work has been discussed at length with BRE and NHBC as and when the information is available.

Over the area of the deep high wall, which is shown on the proposed masterplan as the Highwall Park and Park and Ride areas, it is probable that surface strains would not be controlled to a point that structural damage would not occur. An exclusion zone has therefore been provided in the form of High Wall Park.

Outside of the opencast area, geotechnical issues are considered to be straightforward since the depth of made ground is sufficiently limited to allow the use of piled foundations if necessary.

118 In terms of land stability, it is considered that a condition requiring the future developers to submit a land stability survey for each phase of development for scrutiny by the Local Authority will ensure that any potential for future stability issues can be assessed at that time on a phase by phase basis.

Contamination A Geology and Contamination assessment has been submitted as part of the application. The report addresses the impact of the soil, geology and land contamination upon the proposed new community. Development has been considered; conversely, the impact of the development upon the soils, geology and land contamination has also been assessed.

It should be noted that this document supersedes the previous version issued in July 2008 following discussions and consultations with RMBC and NHBC. The scope of the Global Validation Strategy, required to provide design parameters for the proposed development, has been agreed by the Local Authority and commencement on the program of validation work started in June 2009. The final report is expected to be issued by the end of December 2010.

Landfill- “Waverley Hill” A closed, purpose built landfill site, in the west of the site, contains contaminated wastes from the former Orgreave Coking Plant and other associated historic industries, which were located at the Orgreave Site. The landfill was fully lined and has a leachate collection and passive venting systems. Leachate monitoring, pumping and management are ongoing. Groundwater quality and gas is being monitored in accordance with the Waste Management License governed by the Environment Agency. In view of the strict License controls, it is considered that the landfill will not pose a risk to the soils, geology and groundwater at the site.

Ground Gas Due to the presence of the above mentioned landfill, the mining backfill and possible underground coal workings at the new community site and the surrounding area, including the adjoining Helical Governetz site there is potential for risks relating to ground gas.

Although the landfill is fully contained and monitored and can therefore be discounted as a potential source of hazardous gas, consideration still has to be given to the under ground coal workings and the mining backfill. Therefore as part of the adjacent Helical Governetz validation, ground gas monitoring and subsequent risk assessment was carried out. This assessment indicated a plausible pollutant linkage relating to ground gases and hence a potentially unacceptable risk to human health and property. However it is considered that mitigation of this risk by the installation of gas proof membranes in the ground floors of new buildings is relatively straightforward and acceptable in this instance.

119 Soil Geochemistry Following the decommissioning of the site’s former industrial uses and the backfilling of the opencast coal site, but prior to the establishment of final site levels, a number of ground investigations were carried out. Soil samples were obtained during each of the investigations, for subsequent geochemical testing and a broad screening assessment. Essentially, with the exception of an area running parallel to the River Rother, which has an overhead powerline on it, the results of the screening assessments indicate that the materials are unlikely to pose a risk to receptors and would be suitable for their intended end use.

In the case of the powerline area, the materials at the site were considered likely to be suitable for future use with the exception of two hotspots of contamination. These hotspots were remediated during April 2008 and this entire area is now considered suitable for use.

Summary of Groundwater Quality Assessment Groundwater monitoring has been carried out at locations throughout the new community development site (including Helical Governetz). A generic quantitative risk assessment has been carried out for the groundwater quality beneath the adjoining Helical Governetz site. This was carried out as part of the Helical Governetz Validation, however to date, no specific quantitative risk assessment has been carried out for the new community site. Despite this monitoring is continuing over this area and a full quantitative risk assessment will be carried out and submitted to the Local Authority for scrutiny . However, in order to inform the Environmental Impact Assessment for this Outline planning application, the existing data that has already been screened against generic assessment criteria has been used.

An impact assessment was carried out for 3 scenarios and considers the mitigation necessary to control the impacts that have been defined as being of more than negligible or slight significance.

The report describes the current level of knowledge regarding the baseline conditions of the Waverley New Community site. However at the time of producing the report, an extensive programme of testing and monitoring is underway to provide design parameters for the proposed structures and infrastructure.

The work being undertaken comprises the following:

• Load testing and surface settlement monitoring. This work is required to provide engineering inundation test data for foundation and infrastructure design.

• Groundwater level monitoring to ascertain equilibrium conditions.

• Groundwater and surface water sampling and analysis. This data is required to inform a detailed hydrogeological model of the site.

120 • Shallow soil sampling and chemical analysis. This information is required to ascertain if any additional mitigation is required in private domestic gardens.

• Ground gas monitoring required establishing if prevention measures will be necessary in new buildings to prevent gas ingress.

• The results from this work will be required by the Local Authority for scrutiny prior to commencement of any development in each phase of the site.

Conclusion The restoration proposals included details of the development platforms, which have subsequently been created by UK Coal. Subject to the information and data provided by Harworth Estates when the site validation is completed, expected and required prior to the commencement of the construction of any buildings on site, it is considered that sufficient information has been provided at this stage to make a reasoned judgement on the proposals. Detailed issues on land stability can therefore be considered at detailed design stage. For that reason, it is necessary to add a condition about land stability to this permission if Members are mindful to approve the proposals. This would therefore satisfy the requirements of PPG14.

In terms of contamination, it is considered that all residual impacts to soils and geology and resulting from contamination should be very limited. All historic contamination has been removed and placed in a licensed containment facility, which is monitored and licensed by the Environment Agency. Although there might be on-going issues associated with impacted groundwater, this will be a regional issue associated with recovery of groundwater levels as mine pumping has ceased. In the regional context the new community is not significant and containment of the historic contamination has provided a benefit.

Subject to the submission of ongoing information and data relating to the global validation of the site, the proposals are considered to be in accordance with the principles of UDP Policies ENV4.3 and ENV4.4 and National Polices PPG14 and PPS23

Noise and Disturbance

Policy Background UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ aims to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development and transport. It goes on to say:

‘Planning permission will not be granted for new development which:

• Is likely to give rise, either immediately or in the foreseeable future, to noise, light pollution, pollution of the atmosphere, soil or surface water and ground water, or to other nuisances, where

121 such impacts would be beyond acceptable standards, Government Guidance, or incapable of being avoided by incorporating preventative or mitigating measures at the time the development takes place.’

Planning Policy Guidance 24 ‘Planning and Noise’ provides guidance in relation to both noise generating and noise sensitive developments. The guidance states that where practical the planning system should ensure that noise sensitive developments are separated from major sources of noise, including certain types of industry. Where it is not possible to achieve separation of land uses the Local planning Authority should consider whether it is practical to control or reduce noise levels or mitigate the impact of noise through planning conditions.

Noise Assessment A noise assessment has been submitted as part of the application and assesses the potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the proposed redevelopment and its residential suitability. The key aspects of this assessment are considered to be:

• Construction Impacts: noise and vibration impacts from plant and activities associated with the construction of the proposed development on existing and proposed sensitive receptors. • Operational Impacts: noise impacts from changes to the traffic flows on the local road network, on existing noise sensitive receptors, the impact of commercial use, on both the proposed noise sensitive receptors and other noise sensitive development. • Residential Suitability: an assessment to determine the environmental suitability of the residential aspect of the development.

Construction Impacts A construction assessment has been undertaken based on a preliminary construction programme. It is considered in the Noise Assessment that various activities within the construction programme have the potential to cause significant impact at the nearest sensitive properties; however the magnitude of the significance depends upon the duration of the activity, distance between the construction works and sensitive properties, type of works being undertaken and type of plant used. In this respect the general construction impact has been assessed against the short term daytime measured noise levels to determine the level of significance. The Noise Assessment indicates that ground improvements and construction activities will potentially generate the highest noise levels, but the exact noise level will depend on the distance from the nearest noise sensitive receptor, which will vary depending on which section of the construction activities are occurring. However, the assessment is based upon all activities/plant occurring/operating simultaneously within each phase of the programme, at the same locations and as such, the predicted noise levels are likely to be

122 greater than the expected noise levels and are only deemed to occur during the most intense period of each phase.

Suitable mitigation measures have been proposed to minimise any potential impact. These include restricting hours of working and communicating with the local authority and neighbouring householders throughout the development period. It is however worth noting that whilst this is a significant development with a build out of approximately 20 – 25 years, any construction impacts will be temporary in nature.

Operational Impacts - Traffic Noise A Transport Assessment has been undertaken in order to determine the potential impact on the local highway network due to traffic flow changes associated with the proposed new community. These flows have been factored to obtain day and night time flows in order to establish the noise impact of traffic.

The predicted noise level change has been forecast at 1m from the façade of the noise sensitive receptors and documented in 2 scenarios; the ‘do something’ scenario and the ‘do minimum’ scenario. With respect to the potential nuisance impact arising as a result of increased noise at existing residential receptors due to increased traffic movements, the procedures given in Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) have been used to predict the change in the percentage of people bothered by noise from road traffic with the ‘do nothing’ scenario when compared to the ‘do something scenario’.

Due to changes in the infrastructure in and around the proposed development as part of the redevelopment plans, a number of roads within the surrounding area will experience increased noise levels than if the site was left undeveloped. Operational aspects of some of the proposed development could potentially cause noise disturbance to existing and proposed residential area. However with careful consideration it is considered by the applicant in the Noise Assessment that at the detailed design stage the development can be designed in such a manner as to minimise noise impact and comply with current building regulations, national guidance and local policy.

It is considered that with regard to the residential aspect of the development, appropriate mitigation should be provided to ensure that internal levels meet the relevant standards. In this instance, high specification thermal double glazed window units are proposed to be installed to habitable rooms (living rooms and bedrooms) facing onto the main noise sources such as main roads and access routes. The building layout, orientation and building structure will also be taken into account in the final design process.

Residential Suitability The attended noise surveys undertaken in the Noise Assessment have provided noise levels at two locations around the application site and these can be assessed against the planning guidance in PPG24 to ascertain residential suitability.

123

Following an assessment of the proposed development against relevant guidance provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) some of the proposed residential properties will require mitigation in order to achieve acceptable living conditions as set out above. Despite this the proposed development mostly falls into Noise Exposure category A, in accordance with PPG24.

Conclusion The noise assessment considers the suitability of the site for residential use and the potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed development.

Consideration has been given to all of the information contained within the Noise Assessment and Officers generally agree with the methodology and assessment of information submitted. The only concern therefore relates to the long build out period of development in that the imposition of specific conditions relating to mitigation may significantly change over the period of the build out.

It is considered therefore that in order to control mitigation measures, a condition should be imposed requiring any future reserved matters applications to be accompanied by a full noise assessment in accordance with PPG24 if the proposals include residential properties adjacent to main access roads and railway lines and that any application that comprises commercial units near residential dwellings must submit a BS4142 assessment. This is considered essential to ensure the amenity of future residents is protected. It is therefore not possible for specific conditions relating to noise mitigation to be added at this stage due to the scale of the proposals and length of time it will take to complete the development.

Air Quality

Policy Background UDP Policy ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ seeks to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development and transport. The policy goes on to state that:

‘Planning permission will not be granted for new development which is likely to give rise, either immediately or in the foreseeable future, to noise, light pollution, pollution of the atmosphere, soil or surface water, or to other nuisances, where such impacts would be beyond acceptable standards Government Guidance, or incapable of being avoided by incorporating preventative or mitigating measures at the time the development takes place.’

PPS23 ‘Planning and Pollution Control’ sets out national planning guidance in relation to the assessment of air quality. It confirms that the air quality impacts of a development can be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. Annex 1 to PPS23 provides additional

124 guidance relating to air quality management. It states that local authorities should take into account in development control decision making, any development which may have a direct or indirect bearing on existing air quality or create exposure to poor air quality. Paragraph 10 of PPS23 states that:

‘The planning system plays an important role in determining the location of development which may give rise to pollution, either directly, or from traffic generated, and in ensuring that other developments are, as far as possible not affected by major existing, or potential sources of pollution.’

Paragraph 15 also states the potential importance of cumulative impacts of several developments across a large area. The LPA must be satisfied that when planning permission is granted it takes into account the full environmental impacts.

Air Quality Management Area RMBC has declared several Air Quality Management Areas for annual mean nitrogen dioxide (one of the National Air Quality Strategy pollutants). An Air Quality Management Area is a statutory designation of a defined area and is declared because pollutant levels were predicted to exceed the National Air Quality Strategy Standards by the target year. The Air Quality Management Area in Rotherham which is predicted to be impacted upon by the Waverley Community is the Rotherham MBC M1 Air Quality Management Area.

The M1 Air Quality Management Area was declared in Rotherham against the target for annual average Nitrogen Dioxide (NO 2) on 1st January 2002. The single biggest source within a distance of 100 metres of the M1 is motorway traffic itself.

The location of the M1 Air Quality Management Area lies adjacent to the M1 but currently excludes the application site. Despite this, the whole of Sheffield City Council’s urban area has been designated as an Air Quality Management Area. The site is therefore bordered to the north and south by an Air Quality Management Area.

Due to the proximity of the site to the Air Quality Management Area (1km) a detailed air quality assessment has been carried out on behalf of the applicant and submitted with the application. For the modelling assessment, concentrations of pollutants have been predicted for 2022 with the Waverley development followed by a second scenario of the opening year of the development. In terms of pollutants, traffic, boiler emissions and sensitive receptors have been considered. These are assessed below in accordance with the guidelines produced by The National Society for Clean Air (NSCA):

Scenario 1 – 2022: With Waverley Development Results shown in the Air Quality Assessment indicate that there will be an extremely small increase at all receptors from concentrations of fine particulate matter (dust) with all receptors predicted to be within the relevant

125 air quality objective in 2022. On this basis, the impact was identified as negligible.

With regards to nitrogen dioxide, the largest predicted increases were at on- site locations. The range of increases in modelled nitrogen dioxide concentrations was <1% to 33%, with a forecast increase of 10% or more at four of the modelled locations. The principal reason for the increase in on-site levels of nitrogen dioxide is emissions from the proposed Northern Energy Centre / CHP. On this basis, a moderate adverse impact is predicted at on- site locations, but a substantial adverse impact could occur in the immediate vicinity of the Northern Energy Centre / CHP unless measures are implemented in the design to ensure that no significant adverse impact occurs in practice. As the current application is in outline form, this situation will be considered during the detailed design process, to ensure that no significant adverse impact occurs.

Within Catcliffe and Brinsworth relatively high levels of nitrogen dioxide are forecast even without the proposed new community and exceed the air quality objectives. With the new community the predicted increase is extremely small (less than 1%) at all locations except for the immediate vicinity of the A630, where an increase of up to 4.4% is predicted. On this basis, the effect of the proposed development was identified in the Air Quality assessment as having a slight adverse impact in the areas of Brinsworth and Catcliffe closer to the M1 and A630. These receptors are all located within the designated Air Quality Management Area to the north of the site.

Scenario 2 – Opening Year: With Waverley Development Results in the Air Quality Assessment indicate that there will be a small increase (<1% or 1 day) in concentration of fine particulate matter at all off- site locations. The increases at on site locations are between <1% and 3.4%. Air Quality at on site and off site locations throughout the local area is forecast to comply with the air quality objectives in the opening year of development, with an overall predicted negligible impact.

With regard to nitrogen dioxide, locations in Catcliffe and Brinsworth close to the M1 and A630 are predicted to exceed the nitrogen dioxide Air Quality objectives with or without the proposed new community in the opening year. The predicted impact associated with the development in the areas represented by these locations ranges from extremely small to very small, with a small (6.4%) increase at one location. On this basis, the effect of the proposed development is identified as a slight to moderate adverse impact in this area, with a negligible or slight adverse impact in other areas.

Concentrations of nitrogen dioxide on site are predicted to increase by 5% - 47% as a result of the new community. Modelled levels of nitrogen dioxide were forecast to be above the air quality objective in the immediate vicinity of the Northern Energy Centre / CHP, but are forecast to comply with the objectives in all other locations within the application site. If realised in practice, this increase in concentrations of nitrogen dioxide in the immediate vicinity of the Northern Energy centre / CHP would be classified as very

126 substantial adverse impact, however as described above, this can be mitigated against at detailed design stage.

Queuing Traffic Assessment A separate assessment has been undertaken to determine the impact from increased queuing traffic on the M1/Sheffield Parkway junction. Results in the Air Quality Assessment show that modelled concentrations for all pollutants assessed are not forecast to increase by more than 1% at almost all of the assessed receptor locations. An increase of approximately 2% is forecast at locations very close to the A630. The results therefore indicate that the potential increase in queuing traffic on the M1 and Sheffield Parkway will have a negligible impact upon air quality at the application site and within the surrounding area, except for the immediate vicinity of the A630, where a slight adverse impact is forecast.

Construction The primary potential amenity impacts associated with dust emissions are twofold: • Deposition on and soiling of surfaces; and • Airborne dust leading to potential health effects.

The development is proposed to be phased in a south westerly direction, In the early phases, the residential built up areas of Catcliffe and Treeton will be located within 100 metres of the site. As the development phases are completed, the works will move westwards, increasing the distance from the works to these original receptors. However, the creation of housing on site will ensure that, throughout the development, receptors will be located no more than 10 – 20 metres away from concentration activities.

During the later phases of the development the main construction works will move closer to the residential area of Orgreave and the majority of phases will be located within 100 metres of a receptor throughout the construction process. The prevailing wind direction in this area is south westerly; therefore typically emissions will be blown towards the main residential areas of Catcliffe and Treeton, but away from Orgreave and the proposed Helical Governetz site.

The proximity of the site to receptors and the scale of proposed construction required would indicate that the development has the potential to have a significant impact with regard to fugitive dust emissions without the implementation of suitable mitigation measures.

It is therefore proposed to condition a number of mitigation measures to prevent any adverse impact on existing residents of the outlying villages of Catcliffe, Treeton and Orgreave as well as future residents of Waverley. These will include activities to minimise dust generating activities, use of a water bowser, vehicles switching off their engines when stationary, wheel cleaning and minimising vehicular movements around the site.

Other Air Quality and Odour Issues

127 Pollution Prevention and Control (PPC) is a regulatory regime for controlling pollution from certain industrial activities. The regime is operated by the Environment Agency and is in place to ensure that no pollution is caused due to regulated processes.

The closest installation designated as a Part A industrial process, as specified by the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) regulations is over 1km to the north east of the site. This process is the Outokumpu site, a stainless steel manufacturer. Following an assessment by the applicant’s, regulated industrial processes are not likely to have a significant impact on existing or future baseline air quality at the application site and the operation is located a reasonable distance from the site. The potential environmental impact of any emissions from this process at the application site is therefore considered to be insignificant.

In addition to the above, one Part B Process, as specified by IPPC regulation has been identified within a 500m radius of the application site. This process is Willian Metals Ltd, a metal welding operation located approximately 200m to the north east of the site. Following discussions with Officers, no particular concerns were raised regarding the air quality impact of this process for the future residents and occupiers of the new community.

Odours Through discussions with RMBC and SCC, the applicants have documented an average of 10-20 odour complaints per annum in Sheffield and 4 per annum in Rotherham, these mainly relate to the Woodhouse Mill sewerage works.

The prevailing wind direction in this area is south westerly; which means that the application site does not typically lie downwind of the sewerage treatment works. Furthermore the closest proposed residential properties are approximately 1km from the sewerage treatment works. In contrast, the properties affected by odours from this works are located 250 to 750 metres away, meaning the new residential properties are not likely to introduce a significant additional burden for the operators and regulators of the sewerage treatment works.

As stated above, the current proposals are for the sewerage system from the proposed development to discharge to the Blackburn Meadows sewerage works, some distance from the site. However if the Woodhouse Mill sewerage works can be upgraded, it is possible that the system could be redesigned to discharge to the Woodhouse Mill works. If this scenario comes to fruition there may be potential for odours to occasionally arise at the new development in the event of operational problems at the Woodhouse Mill sewerage works, these are likely to be less severe than those experienced at existing residential areas closer to the works.

Conclusion The air quality assessment has been revised and re-submitted as part of an Environmental Statement dated October 2009 following discussions with

128 Officers and the submission of the revised Transport Assessment. The main findings of the air quality assessment are that air quality at the development site itself is predicted to meet the Government’s health based objectives for nitrogen dioxide annual mean. However, levels of nitrogen dioxide annual mean are predicted to increase by between <1% and 33% (2022) and 5%- 47% for 2032. For most of the site, this is classified according to guidance as either a slight or moderate adverse impact on air quality on the development site itself. As stated in Section 6 of the ES Technical Annex 1:Air Quality, it is predicted that a very substantial adverse impact could occur in the immediate vicinity of the Northern Energy Centre / CHP ‘unless measures are implemented in the design to ensure that no significant adverse impact occurs in practice’.

The assessment has been based on a worst case scenario but the results indicate the need to confirm of the impacts of the Combined Heat and Power plants with a detailed study of the final design of the Energy Centres including further modelling. As stated in Section 6 of the ES Technical Annex 1: Air Quality, ‘a range of options would be open, including reallocation [of the impacted area] to a less sensitive use (e.g. commercial); relocation of this sensitive location relative to potential sources of oxides of nitrogen; or changes to the scheme design such as a higher discharge point [stack] for the energy centre’. The CHP plants have been proposed as a more environmentally sustainable and less polluting option compared with individual boilers installed in each property. The report does stress that the detailed design process should ensure that adverse impacts will not occur.

The ES contains predictions of the impact of the development on levels of nitrogen dioxide annual mean and particulate matter (PM 10) in Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council and Sheffield City Council’s Air Quality Management Areas, where air quality does not currently meet the UK’s National Air Quality Standards. With regard to nitrogen dioxide, locations in Catcliffe and Brinsworth close to the M1 and A630 are predicted to exceed the nitrogen dioxide annual mean Air Quality objective with or without the proposed new community in the opening year. The predicted impact associated with the development in the areas represented by these locations ranges from extremely small to very small, with a small (6.4%) increase at one location. On this basis, the effect of the proposed development is identified as a slight to moderate adverse impact in this area, with a negligible or slight adverse impact in other areas.

Sustainability

Policy Background The Yorkshire and Humber Regional Spatial Strategy Policy YH1 sets the overall approach and key spatial priorities of the Strategy up to 2026. These priorities include:

• Transform economic, environmental and social conditions in the regeneration priority areas;

129 • Enhance the role of Sheffield as an important business location within its wider city region; • Protect and enhance the region’s environmental resources; • Avoid exacerbating environmental threats to the region and reduce the region’s exposure to those threats; • Avoid increasing flood risk, and manage land and river catchments for flood mitigation, renewable energy generation, biodiversity enhancement and increased tree cover; and • Ensure that transport management and investment support and help deliver the spatial strategy.

Policy YH2, ‘Climate Change and Resource Use’ states that investment decisions and programmes should:

• Increase population, development and activity in cities and towns; • Encourage better energy, resource and water efficient buildings; • Minimise resource demands from development; • Reduce traffic growth through appropriate location of development, demand management, and improving public transport and facilities for walking and cycling; • Encourage development of previously developed land; • Facilitate effective waste management; and • Increase renewable energy capacity and carbon capture.

Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1) ‘Creating Sustainable Communities’ sets out the Government's overarching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development through the planning system. These include:

• Social cohesion and inclusion; • The protection and enhancement of the environment; • Prudent use of natural resources; • Sustainable economic development; and • Integrating sustainable development in development plans.

It also describes how to deliver sustainable development, covering:

• The general approach; • Spatial plans; • Design; and • Community involvement.

Supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1: ‘Planning and Climate Change’ - This supplement to PPS1 places more emphasis on creating communities with the supporting infrastructure and technologies to reduce carbon emissions and promote a sustainable approach to living. Of particular relevance is the recommendation that local authorities promote the development of plot level and decentralised low and zero carbon technologies and recommends that the wider impacts of climate change are considered within a development application. It also encourages the local authority to

130 develop an evidence base to support the promotion of renewable energy and/ or carbon targets.

Sustainability Assessment A Sustainability Assessment (SA) of Waverley has been undertaken by the applicant during the masterplanning process. The aim of the Sustainability Assessment has been to challenge the scheme at each design phase and masterplan evolution to ensure that a high quality, sustainable development is promoted at the design, construction and operational phases of development and ensure that relevant planning policy is promoted at all stages. The most recent version of the Sustainability Assessment (October 2009) summarises the minimum sustainability commitments of the scheme and identifies a range of further measures that will be considered at detailed design phase. Examples of some of the commitments to date are:

• A commitment to achieve a minimum Code For Sustainable Homes level 4 rating across the site with the aspiration of increasing this value during the construction programme. • Use of design features to minimise and mitigate the impacts of climate change, including provision of green spaces and water bodies and orientation of buildings to minimise excessive solar gain. • Maintenance and enhancement of existing footpaths on the site and provision of a network of high quality pedestrian and cycle links throughout the site with links to the Trans Pennine Trail. • Creation of high quality habitat to enhance the biodiversity of the site and enable links to the nearby Catcliffe Flash and Woodhouse Washlands LNR. • Incorporation of SuDs across the site to minimise surface water run-off and the risk of flooding • Use of the Manual for Streets guidance to contribute towards a high quality development; and • Redevelopment of a contaminated, brownfield site.

A number of commitments have also been made with regard to energy and have been summarized in the section below.

In addition to the commitments already in place there are a number of additional features that will be explored during the detailed design process. Examples of these are;

• Use Building Research Establishments’ (BRE) Green Guide to Specification to assist with material selection, in line with the requirements in the Code for Sustainable Homes • Incorporate measures to reduce water consumption (e.g. through installation of rainwater collection systems / greywater recycling / water meters) • Provide cycle storage space within dwellings and the central square.

Conclusion

131

A number of commitments have been identified through the Sustainability Appraisal process to improve the sustainability performance of the new community at Waverley. Furthermore, a range of additional measures have been identified for consideration during detailed design. Should all of the identified and potential sustainability measures be implemented then Waverley can be said to be a ‘high quality’ development which promotes the principles of sustainable development

Renewable Energy

Policy Background UDP Policy UTL3.4 ‘Renewable Energy’ favours proposals for the generation of power from renewable energy sources unless the proposed development would cause demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance.

The Yorkshire and Humber Regional Spatial Strategy Policy ENV5 ‘Energy’ seeks to maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increases in renewable energy capacity. It states that new developments of 10 dwellings or more or 1000 sqm of non residential floorspace should secure a minimum of 10% of their energy from decentralised or renewable local carbon sources, unless, having regard to the type of development involved and its design, this is not feasible or viable.

Planning Policy Statement: ‘Planning and Climate Change supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1’ states that tackling climate change is a key Government priority for the planning system. It sets out how regional and local planning should contribute to reducing emissions and stabilising climate change and take into account the unavoidable consequences. The PPS also states that planning authorities should have an evidence based understanding of the local feasibility and potential of renewable and local carbon technologies. Local Planning Authorities should therefore set a target percentage of the energy to be used in new development from renewable and low carbon energy sources where it is viable.

Planning Policy Statement 22: ‘Renewable Energy’ - The document states that developments should provide at least 10% of their energy via renewable sources with a target of 20% by 2020. The document lists these sources and provides guidance as to how the 10% contribution can be met. The document also presents an energy hierarchy to provide an indication of how energy should be sourced in a development. The policy supports the move toward decentralised energy through the development of district heating and power systems.

Energy Needs and Demands Waverley new community is a residential led mixed use scheme with a significant energy demand of approximately 64 million kilowatt hours per annum and resulting carbon emissions in excess of 17 million tonnes per annum. The heat, energy and cooling demands of this development varies but is dominated by the typical energy profile of a domestic dwelling. An analysis

132 of this energy profile has been undertaken by the applicant’s as part of the ‘Energy Strategy including Renewables October 2009’ and has been used to identify the most commercially and technically viable solutions to energy demand. The single biggest advantage of a mixed use scheme in terms of energy demand is the requirement for power, heat and potentially cooling during typical office hours when the demand from residential properties is significantly lower. This ‘base load’ can be used to provide a commercial demand for a number of low and zero carbon technologies which has been investigated thoroughly during the design process.

Low and Zero Carbon Renewable Energy Options

An analysis of all current commercially and technically viable low and zero carbon (LZC) technologies has been undertaken and reported by the applicant and reviewed by specialist consultants. It is important to note that there are many factors affecting the viability of LZC technologies which include;

• Energy demand profile • Commercial viability of LZC technologies in a residential led scheme • Environmental constraints to development of technologies such as wind turbines • Forthcoming legislation such as Feed In Tariffs (FITS); • Phasing of development

A review and consultation process has been undertaken by RMBC (supported by specialist consultants) and the Waverley team to ensure that the approach and investigation into the issues surround LZC technologies at Waverley have been thorough and in line with the policy and RMBC expectations. The current energy strategy by the applicants presents an energy strategy that meets and potentially exceeds these policies (specifically Policy ENV5 of the RSS) as well as establishing a platform and future approach to deliver a high quality development that in many cases exceeds the performance of similar new communities currently proposed in the UK. During the consultation process it was identified that the energy strategy should be linked to the construction phasing programme to allow for a progressive improvement in the LZC technologies in line with commercial, technical and legislative developments. In summary the main commitments and aspirations of the LZC strategy at Waverley as presented by the applicant are as follows;

1. Promotion of energy efficient building design in line with Code For Sustainable Homes requirements and building regulations to reduce the energy demand 2. Installation of solar thermal panels into the first 510 residential dwellings (Phase 1a – approximately 2012-2014) to achieve compliance with the energy requirements of Code Level 4 and providing an estimated 9% of the total building energy demand from renewable energy. 3. Proposed connection of subsequent construction phases (approximately 2015-2031) to a decentralised energy network with twin

133 energy centres including gas fired Combined Heat and Power (CHP), gas and biomass boiler plant at a northern energy centre and bio-fuel CHP and biomass boiler plant at a final phase southern energy centre. 4. A commitment to review the energy strategy at each construction phase through the design coding process to allow for changes in the commercial, technical and legislative frameworks which may facilitate a change in strategy but ultimately maintaining the goal of a low carbon high quality community.

Should the commitments and proposed further measures contained within the Waverley ‘Energy Strategy Including Renewables’ be implemented then the development is likely to significantly exceed Policy ENV 5 of the RSS of securing at least 10% of energy from decentrilised and renewable or low carbon sources and can therefore be regarded as a ‘High Quality’ development that seeks to implement best practice and minimise carbon emissions.

Carbon Impact Based on the implementation of the LZC energy strategy described above, it is reported that Waverley will achieve an overall 61% reduction in Carbon emissions (excluding appliance loads). As the construction phasing develops and allowing for minor design changes in line with changes in the technical, commercial and legislative frameworks then it is anticipated that Project Waverley will be cable of achieving the 70% onsite CO 2 reductions in accordance with the proposed redefinition of Zero-Carbon.

In summary, should the proposed energy strategy be implemented in full, the new community at Waverley can be said to be making a significant contribution to the reduction of carbon emissions and the threat presented by Global Climate Change.

Establishment of a Management Company

Background The new community will include significant areas of unadopted public open space, woodland, reservoir, lakes, common areas, urban drainage system, footways, parking areas and a community centre. The Council during early discussions, indicated to Harworth Estates Limited (the applicant) that it is not in a position to accept by way of dedication or transfer these areas upon completion.

Proposals The applicant will enter into a planning obligation not to occupy any part of the site for residential or commercial uses without the management company having first been established. This therefore means that the Management Company will need to be established prior to any resident or commercial organisation occupying any of the residential or commercial properties on the site.

134 The day-to-day operations of the Management Company will be run by its Board of directors. Such Board will comprise the following: • executive directors (maximum of four) – these may be full or part time posts, initially appointed by the applicant. The quality and combined skill set of these individuals will be crucial for the success of the management company • non-executive directors (maximum of eight) – these will be residents/occupiers appointed by residents committees and (in the initial phases) may include up to two non-executive positions such as nominated members of RMBC • all directors have the right to attend and speak at board meetings. However, up and until the point at which the development reaches practical completion, only the executive directors will have voting rights. Directors can be removed from office by a majority vote of the Board and/or its members in general meeting.

Initially, the sole member of the Management Company will be the applicant. However, as the development progresses, residents will become members of the Management Company on purchasing a property in the new community. Members will be eligible to join a residents committee. It is envisaged that there will be seven or eight of such committees and these will be grouped according to "use" e.g. residential area, commercial, affordable housing etc. Each committee will select a member from its group to be its representative on the Board of directors of the Management Company. Such representative will be classified as a non-executive director.

Voting rights will only be granted to the non-executive directors and the members who are residents once the development has reached practical completion or the applicant decides to relinquish its control of WCMCo. It is envisaged that this is unlikely within the first 20 years from commencement of development. Pending the applicant relinquishing its control of WCMCo, the residents continue to have their contractual and legislative rights together with the non-voting involvement in WCMCo, all as outlined in the previous FAQ's responses above.

In relation to the financing of the Management Company, the facilities, which are to be privately managed and maintained, will give rise to an ongoing financial liability, which must be met through revenues. The ability to render a service charge is, therefore, critical if the management and maintenance of these facilities is not to be provided by RMBC. The intended sources of revenue for the Management Company can be summarised as follows:

• service charges (the obligation to pay such service charges will be contained in the contract entered into by each resident and occupier with the management company. Under this contract, the Management Company will provide services in consideration of the Resident paying the requisite level of service charge); • charges for use of the Management Company managed facilities;

135 • public funding e.g. grants, LA service level agreement, LSP funding through local area agreements; • charitable funding initiatives; • private funding e.g. UK Coal “dowry”, housebuilders etc.

During the early development stages of the development, there will obviously be very few (if any) residents and occupiers. The bulk of the initial funding will therefore be generated through an initial “dowry” payment by the applicant's parent company UK Coal Mining Ltd to the Management Company of approximately £4,000,000. The Management Company will be a not for profit organisation and therefore, in the event that it does make a surplus, the surplus will be available to re-invest.

Responsibilities The principal contract for the provision of services will be between the Management Company and the residents of the new community. Services may inevitably need to change over time and the Management Company and the residents require some form of flexibility to respond to this change. At the outset, however, the Management Company will have responsibility for the following generic areas:

• Sustainability – upholding, promoting and progressing the sustainability agenda • Enterprise – promoting economic development and events such as markets • Community Development – promoting community development and the development of social networks (clubs associations within and outside the community) • Design – promoting understanding of the Design Code, guiding its use and monitoring its application.

Managing and maintaining community assets including –

• Open space and public realm (community park, greenways, public/civic space and public art) • Sport and recreation (e.g. pitches, play areas) • Community facilities (e.g. community centre, park, allotments, etc) • Infrastructure – this may include energy services provision via an energy services company (‘ESCO’) or multi-utilities services company (‘MUSCO’) • Involvement in affordable housing initiatives and management • Community investment – where income exceeds overhead (e.g. community projects, sustainability initiatives, affordable housing)

Conclusion The above information has been subject to scrutiny by Corporate Management Team (CMT) who after consideration are largely in agreement with the proposals for the establishment of the management company as a means of managing and maintaining unadopted public open space, woodland,

136 reservoir, lakes, common areas, urban drainage system, footways and parking areas. This agreement is mainly based upon a decision made in 2001 by the Local Authority that only in exceptional circumstances could any consideration be given to adopting new land. This is due to the inadequacy of budgets to maintain even the existing land holding. Since this time, the responsibility of maintenance of any new public open space has therefore fallen on the developer and has been delivered through Section 106 Legal Agreements.

In this instance, the sheer scale of the public open space extends to some 130 hectares and includes managed parklands such as Highwall Park and landscaping of non adopted highways. The maintenance of these areas, which would be required in perpetuity would be an immense drain on the Local Authority’s resources and would not accord with current policy in this respect. Furthermore, the responsibilities of the management company go beyond purely the maintenance of open space and would cover assets such as the community centre, sports and recreation, infrastructure such as the Combined Heat and Power and sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS).

In this instance it is therefore considered acceptable that a management company to manage and maintain these assets is established prior to the occupation of the first dwelling and is run on a not for profit not for loss basis.

Parish Council Boundary Review The Waverley development encompasses both Orgreave and Catcliffe Parish Councils. The majority of the proposed residential development is within the existing Orgreave Parish Council Boundary. Orgreave is a Parish of 300+ households, so the addition of 4000 households will be considerable.

A review of the Parish Council Boundaries is currently taking place across the whole borough which comprises both parished and unparished areas. The main aim of the review was to ensure that parish boundaries continue to reflect the identities and interests of the communities they serve, are meaningful, and facilitate the delivery of effective and convenient services. The review covered the whole of the borough, whether currently parished or not. However, it was intended that the review should also cover more fundamental issues such as whether parishes should be created in parts of the borough which do not presently have them, whether current parish boundaries should be altered other than merely to address anomalies, whether existing parishes might be amalgamated, or whether new parishes might be created from within existing parishes.

A report was recently taken to Cabinet (01.07.09) informing Officers of the outcome of the consultation element of the review and which also set out recommendations proposed by Officers and Member Working Groups relating to individual Parishes. Relevant recommendations to Catcliffe and Orgreave Parish Councils are set out below:

Catcliffe Parish Council

137 ‘It is recommended that current boundaries are maintained. Catcliffe Parish Council submitted proposals for change which cannot be supported because they would require Electoral Commission changes to Borough Ward boundaries with no apparent reason, involve Sheffield City Council’s boundaries and conflict with Brinsworth Parish Council and the two Parish Councils have been unable to reach agreement.

However, it is noted that the Waverley Development is proposed in this area and significant change will take place over the mid to long term. It is further recommended that the area be kept under review as the scheme develops and that a local governance review for this area be conducted after a period of five years.’

Orgreave Parish Council ‘It is recommended that the boundary between Orgreave Parish and Treeton Parish is realigned along the Orgreave side of the River Rother so that the river forms the natural boundary between the two parishes; no residential properties are affected and it is wholly contained within the Rother Vale Borough Ward.

The proposal was submitted by Orgreave and is supported by Treeton Parish Council. It would also affect a boundary of Aston-cum-Aughton Parish Council and no response has been received to a request for Aston-cum-Aughton to comment.”

As stated above, the recommendation for Orgreave P.C. varies the boundary in only a minor way between Treeton and Orgreave so in this respect there is little change to the existing parishes that fall within the catchments of Waverley, i.e., mainly Catcliffe, Orgreave, and possibly Treeton.

Therefore the areas of the Waverley development that are parished will remain parished and the parts that are unparished will also remain that way. The Council are not, at this current time, proposing to bring the unparished parts of Waverley into Orgreave parish although it is acknowledged that this may make sense in the long term. Comments have been raised regarding the new community at Waverley, however it was considered that as there was still uncertainty about the development the Council could not make this change now but would keep the situation under review as the scheme develops.

Planning Obligations The legal test for a planning obligation is that there must be some connection between what is proposed (development) and that which is offered (obligation) which is more than de minimis. Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act and Section 12(1) of the 1991 Planning and Compensation Act form the legislative basis for the use of planning obligations in the planning system. DCLG Circular 05/2005 explains that they are intended to make acceptable development which would otherwise be unacceptable in planning terms. In all cases the outcome of requiring planning obligations should be that the proposed development concerned is made to accord with published local, regional and / or national policies.

138

Circular 05/2005 states that planning obligations must be:

• relevant to planning • necessary to make the proposed development acceptable in planning terms • directly related to the proposed development • fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development • reasonable in all other respects .

Developers will not be required to make any contribution for facilities that are needed solely in order to resolve existing deficiencies. The policy tests are more restrictive than the legal test and would be applied in relation to any independent examination in public.

The following list of obligations, which should be treated as a material consideration when determining the planning application, meet all of the tests set out in Circular 05/2005 and are in accordance with local, regional and national policy:

Theme Requirements Estimated Cost (£) 1. Harworth Estates will provide Affordable Housing at Affordable the Waverley New Community development in Housing accordance with the following provisions:

a) applications for Reserved Matter for the WNC development shall be in accordance with the relevant Design Code for each of the phases identified in the submitted Design and Access Statement. b) Reserved Matters consent (except for exempt infrastructure) shall not be granted by Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council until an Affordable Housing Scheme has been agreed with RMBC for the relevant phase. c) The number of units in the Affordable Housing Scheme for each phase shall be provided as follows:

• Phase 1: 5% of 915 units being 45 Affordable Housing units provided that such units will not have to be delivered until after the completion of the 510 th market house. • Phase 2: 22.5% of 966 units being 217 Affordable Housing units.

139 • Phase 3: 25% of 984 units being 246 Affordable Housing units. • Phase 4:30% of 1025 units being 308 Affordable Housing units. d) The Affordable Housing units shall be provided in the ration of 44 per cent Shared Ownership units and 56 per cent Social Rented Accommodation to be made available to qualifying persons. e) If Harworth Estates cannot reasonably procure the provision of the aforesaid percentages and tenure of Affordable Housing because of market conditions prevailing at the time of each Reserved Matters application Harworth Estates shall agree an alternative scheme in writing with the Council for the provision of the Affordable Housing. 2. a) Pursuant to s.14 of the Education Act 1996 11,107,783 Education and s.111 of the Local Government Act 1972 Harworth Estates will provide the land and a financial contribution towards the provision of two 2 form entry primary schools with pre-school education accommodation in accordance with the following terms. b) The land if provided in full shall comprise a plot Indexed of land for each of the two primary schools for the provision of a primary school including a junior football pitch. Each plot of land shall be a minimum of 18,256 sq m being sufficient in area to meet the area guidance for a 2 form entry primary school as set out in Appendix 4 Building Bulletin 99 (2 nd Edition). The plots shall be located in the approximate position shown in the Design and Access Statement unless RMBC agree otherwise.

c) The land for each of the primary schools shall be transferred by Harworth Estates to RMBC within 91 days following a Determination by the Determining Authority that each school is to be established at that location. d) The financial contribution for the primary schools shall be calculated from the DCFS Basic Need Cost multiplier prevailing at the time the school is due to be built (indexed to the Pubsec Non- Housebuilding Index) multiplied by the Local Cost Adjustment for Rotherham multiplied by the number of places per school (primary plus nursery) multiplied by the number of schools The current figure at Q4 2008 equals £12,257 (DCFS Cost Multiplier) x 0.96 (Rotherham adjustment) x 472 (420 primary plus 52 nursery) x 2 (schools) equals £11,107,783. (The

140 contribution is indexed linked as above to the prevailing DSCF cost figure/Rotherham adjustment at the time the school is due to be built)

e) The financial contribution for each of the primary schools to be paid to RMBC by Harworth Estates in the following manner: i) 5% 91 days following Determination for the first primary school but no sooner than 400 houses occupied. ii) 45% within 30 days of RMBC approval of the Tender to apply the first school premises but no sooner than 550 dwellings. iii) 5% 91 days following a Determination for the second primary school but no sooner than 1550 dwellings iv) 45% within 30 days of RMBC approval of the Tender to supply the second school premises but no sooner than 1750 dwellings.

Provided that the obligation shall cease to have effect and the land shall be transferred back to Harworth Estates if the said schools shall not have been provided within 5 years of Determination of the respective schools.

3. Indoor a) To construct a Community Centre prior to the 1,780,000 Community occupation of the ninth hundred and fifteenth facilities dwelling.

b) The Community Centre means a building [Cost of fit comprising community facilities (approximately 400 out £250k square metres), library (approximately 340 square based on metres which shall be available for letting to the MLA Council at a market rent) and offices for use by the Document] Management Company (approximately 120 square metres) to be located, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council, in Orgreave Square approximately in the position shown in the DAS.

141 4. Open To provide the following open space and play Space/Outdoor facilities in the manner described below. All play facilities provision to be managed and maintained in accordance with BSEN1173 and designed in accordance with the design guide from Play England. a) To provide play facilities as described in the 755,000 following table :

No. Type Location (Completion of) Dwellings 3 LEAP Local 915, 2865 and 3890 Parks 1 NEAP Highwall 1880 and 2865 Park 1 LAP Local 915, Parks 2 LAP Local 1880 Parks 2 LAP Local 2865 Parks 2 LAP Local 3890 Parks

b) To provide a Multiple Use Games Area prior to 185,000 the completion of the 1880th dwelling in the vicinity of Highwall Park in the approximate position shown in the DAS comprising a 25m x 35m floodlit tarmac surface with football goals and basketball hoops with rebound boards and surface markings. c) Prior to the completion of the 915 th dwelling to 120,000 pay to the Council the sum of one hundred and twenty thousand pounds (£120,000) towards the cost of providing three adult football pitches in the vicinity of Handsworth. d) Prior to the completion of the 1880th dwelling £55,000 to pay to the Council the sum of fifty-five thousand pounds (£55,000) towards the cost of upgrading the football pitches at Treeton. e) Prior to the completion of the 1880th dwelling 104,000 to pay to the Council the sum of one hundred and four thousand pounds (£104,000) towards the cost of providing two adult football pitches in the vicinity of Woodhouse Mill. f) To provide a Youth Shelter prior to the 12,500 completion of the 915 th dwelling in the vicinity of the Multiple Use Games Area. g) To provide a Youth Shelter prior to the 12,500 completion of the 2865 th dwelling in the vicinity of Primary School 2.

142 h) To provide as part of Phases 2 and 3 thirty 350,000 allotments on the land to the east of the River Rother, each allotment to measure at least thirty metres by ten metres to be supplemented by toilet, storage, kitchen and car parking facilities.

i) To upgrade the pedestrian bridge crossing the 75,000 River Rother in the vicinity of the proposed allotments subject to a maximum expenditure of seventy five thousand pounds (£75,000). 5. a) To provide a Health Centre and adjoining car NIL Healthcare parking area in accordance with the business plan of and according to a programme to be agreed with Rotherham Primary Care Trust. The Health Centre to be located in Orgreave Square unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Council provided that the provision of the Health Centre shall be subject to the availability of funding by Rotherham Primary Care Trust and to letting on commercial terms. b) Until such time as the Health Centre is provided and following occupation of the 915 th dwelling, Harworth Estates to provide on commercial terms 100 sq m of floorspace for use by the PCT to provide health services to the Waverley New Community, pending delivery of the permanent Health Centre. c) A Health Centre means a building to be used for healthcare purposes of at least 1,300 square metres to meet the specification set out in guidelines issued by the Department of Health;

6. Air To pay RMBC the sum of £2000 per annum to be 40,000 Quality used by the Council for the purpose of air quality Contribution monitoring subject to a total aggregated payment of £40,000. 7. Waverley To pay to RMBC a financial contribution comprising 1,300,000 Link Road 10% of the Quantified Cost Estimate up to a maximum of £1.3 million towards the provision of the WLR linking the B6006 at Highfield Spring to the B6200 at Woodhouse Spring. Such contribution only to be paid if such a contribution has not already been paid under the terms of planning permission for the development of the Highfield Commercial site and, for the avoidance of doubt, such contribution only to be paid once in relation to either the WNC, the Helical Governetz, or the Highfield Commercial schemes. Any contribution shall be paid in monthly instalments equating to no more than 10% of the Qualified Cost Estimate incurred in the proceeding calendar month in constructing the WLR. Provided

143 that should the Waverley Link Road not proceed within 10 years of the date of the s.106 Agreement the obligation to pay the contribution shall expire.

The landowner will dedicate a definitive route for a public highway, referred to as Waverley Link Road and shown in sketch form on drawing number xxxx, across the site on a route to be agreed by the LPA and the landowner.. A deed of dedication will be provided within 28 days of such a request being made by the LPA.

8. Transport Interchange Provisions Transport a) To reserve the Park and Ride scheme land as Interchange shown on drawing Ref: xx for the construction of Contributions infrastructure to serve the Park and Ride and Transport Interchange in accordance with the Waverley masterplan and to make the Park and Ride scheme land and access thereto available for use by SYPTE as agreed with RMBC and SYPTE following the granting of planning permission for the Park and Ride and Transport Interchange. b) To pay to South Yorkshire Passenger 200,000 Transport Executive the sum of two hundred thousand pounds (£200,000) towards the cost of the transport interchange adjacent to the Park and Ride facility to be provided by the SYPTE at Waverley. Such contribution to be made on the formal appointment of the main contractor engaged to construct the transport interchange. c) To provide reasonable structural landscaping 100,000 around perimeter fencing in accordance with planning permission obtained by South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive in respect of the transport interchange and Park and Ride facility.

144 d) At the request of South Yorkshire Passenger 600,000 Transport Executive to procure a building not to exceed 225 sq m in gross internal area. for use as a ticket office and passenger information centre. Provided that the cost of such building shall not exceed £600,000 and provided also that (i) this obligation shall cease to have effect if the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive fail to make the request for transfer within 5 years of obtaining planning permission for the Park & Ride and Transport Interchange or (ii) if the land has been transferred the obligation shall cease to have effect and the land shall be transferred back to Harworth Estates if the said land shall not have been put into use within 5 years of obtaining planning permission for the Park & Ride and Transport Interchange. 9. Travel a) Prior to the occupation of the first Dwelling, to 1,614,000 Plan Measures implement so far as reasonably practicable Harworth maximum Estate’s obligations under the Travel Plan including with the formation of the Travel Plan Steering Group contribution whose terms of reference shall include authority to as follows: vary from time to time the sums referred to in this Schedule to ensure best value and to continue to monitor the Travel Plan by way of annual travel surveys.

b) To pay £1.614 million towards the measures set out in the Travel Plan. The first £790,000 to be paid out in the manner set out below over the first 5 years from the commencement of development. Thereafter the balance of £824,000 shall be paid towards further Travel Plan measures as approved by the Travel Plan Steering Group.

c) To pay to the Management Company prior to 210,000 the occupation of the first Dwelling the sum of £30,000 and a further sum of £30,0000 on the first anniversary of the initial payment and a further sum of £50,000 on the second, third and fourth anniversaries of the initial payment for the purpose of funding the appointment of the Sustainable Travel Plan Manager and measures necessary to help deliver the objectives set out in the Travel Plan.

d) To pay to the Management Company prior to 150,000 first occupation of any dwelling a sum not exceeding £100,000 for the purpose of financing a car club service to residents to be used to locate 2 cars on site and a further £50,000 for free annual membership for all dwellings in the first phase.

145 e) To pay to the Management Company prior to 70,000 first occupation of any dwelling a sum not exceeding £70,000 for the purpose of providing real time information on transport options and availability. Such sum broken down with the sum of £50,000 to be used for the provision of real time information for apartment blocks and £20,000 for other locations. f) To pay to the Management Company prior to 10,000 completion of 600 dwellings a sum not exceeding £10,000 for the purpose of providing a pool bicycle scheme. g) To pay to the Management Company prior to 150,000 first occupation of any dwelling a sum not exceeding £50,000 for the purpose of providing purchasers of dwellings with travel packs detailing optional modes of travel and pedestrian routes and a further sum not exceeding £100,000 to be spread equally over the next five years for the purpose of undertaking annual travel surveys for the first 5 years of occupation on site. h) Prior to the first occupation of any dwelling for 200,000 residential purposes and for 5 years thereafter only to pay the Travel Card Commuted Sum of £200,000 into a joint bank account in the names of Harworth Estates and the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive. Such bank account to operate subject to the following conditions:

• the Travel Card Commuted Sum shall represent the cost of providing the first occupier of each residential dwelling with an annual SYPTE Developer Traffic Master Card and shall not be used for any other purpose;

• on the date of the sale of a dwelling to the first occupier, Harworth Estates shall offer to provide the first occupier with a travel card;

• Harworth Estates shall not be obliged to provide more than one travel card per dwelling;

• in the event of the first occupier not accepting the offer of a travel card within 28 days of the date of the offer by Harworth Estates, Harworth Estates liability in respect of a Travel Card for that dwelling

146 shall be of no further effect;

• on the issue of each travel card the Traffic Card Commuted Sum shall be reduced by the cost of providing that travel card which shall be credited to South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive; and

• on the expiry of the period of 28 days following the first occupation of the last dwelling to be occupied for residential purposes the outstanding balance of the Travel Card Commuted Sum together with all interest accrued thereon shall be paid to Harworth Estates and the joint bank account in respect thereof closed.

• To provide or procure the provision of a SYPTE Developer Travel Master Card to the first occupier of any dwelling with 28 working days of receiving acceptance in writing from such occupier of the offer made by the Owner.

10. Public Where the Bus Rapid Transit scheme does not 1,500,000 Transport proceed to pay a maximum sum of £1.5 million for Measures the improvement of future public transport provision. Such sum to be paid at the direction of the Travel Plan Steering Group on the following basis: The sum of £ 40,000 to be paid prior to the occupation of the fist dwelling and to be used for the provision of new bus shelters on Poplar Way

A further £500,000 to be paid, if necessary, prior to the completion of each of the 1880th and 2865th dwellings respectively

The balance of the funds to be paid, if necessary, prior to the completion of the 3890 th dwelling.

147 11. J33 (a) To enter into an agreement under s.278 of the s.278 Highway Works Highways Act 1980 for the purposes of carrying out Works or the highway works to J33 of the M1 and the A630 total Parkway as shown on indicative drawing Ref: xxxx contribution (or as otherwise agreed in writing with the Council) of up to such works to be completed prior to the occupation £1miilion of the 2500th dwelling of the development provided that should the highway works be undertaken in the interim by the Highways Agency or the Council or some other highway authority then to pay a contribution of up to £760,000 towards the undertaking of the works, such payment also to be made on the occupation of the 2500 th dwelling of the development.

[(b) To pay a sum of £232,500 as a contribution to the J34 Half-Penny Link highway improvement scheme such payment to be made on the letting of the road construction contract for the whole scheme. Provided that should the whole of the J34Half-Penny Link highway improvement scheme not proceed within 10 years of the execution of the s.106 Agreement this obligation to make a contribution shall expire.

12. Highfield To reinstate Highfield Lane to an adoptable standard Lane in the approximate position shown in the Design and Access Statement. 13. New Prior to the construction of any dwellings on site to Highways enter into an agreement or agreements with the Council under section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 for the construction by Harworth Estates and the adoption by RMBC of all access roads and estate roads constructed pursuant to the planning permission and shown generally in the Design and Access Statement. 14. Prior to occupation of the first building on site to 4,500,000 Management establish a Management Company on terms Company acceptable to RMBC to take responsibility for the management and maintenance of the Community Infrastructure and all areas of public realm and open space The costs associated with establishment of the Management Com pany will not exceed £500,000. In addition an amount of up to £4,000,000 will be required to subsidise the Management Company in the early years of its operation, until it becomes self- financing

148 Total 24,410,783 (Excluding AH) (excluding J33/34 highway works)

Conclusion and Recommendation The proposal has been considered against all relevant matters including national, regional and local policy and guidance and in light of all of the representations received. The proposals, whilst not in accordance with the current UDP are generally in accordance with Regional and National policies and where they are not, reasoned justification has been given. The development will supply some of the quantum of housing needed in the Borough to assist in achieving the housing targets set out in the RSS, as well as a proportion of affordable housing and will provide the scale and range of services and facilities required to enable the establishment of a successful mixed sustainable community.

The development would have clear impacts on the highway network, however mitigation measures will be put in place to reduce this so far as is practical. Improved public transport provision will be established benefiting not only the future residents of Waverley but also the existing residents of the outlying villages. On balance, it is considered that the benefits of developing this former colliery site, together with the matters that would be secured via the S106 planning agreement, would outweigh any negative impacts the development would have on the surrounding highway network.

It is therefore recommended that consequent upon the Secretary of State deciding not to intervene, planning permission be granted subject to completion of an agreement between the applicant and the Council pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

149

RB2008/1695

Outline application with all matters reserved except for the means of access for the development of 60,000m² of B1 office space, 120 bed hotel and ancillary retail and leisure facilities at land off Highfield Spring, Catcliffe for Helical Governetz.

RECOMMENDATION:

A. That the Council enters into a legal agreement with the applicant under the provisions of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the purposes of ensuring:

(i) A commuted sum to provide 10% of the total cost of the Waverley Link Road up to a maximum of £1,300,000. Such contribution only to be paid if it has not already been paid under the terms of the Waverley New Community. The contribution will be paid in monthly instalments equating to no more than 10% of the cost incurred in the proceeding calendar month in constructing the link road. (ii) Prior to the first occupation of the office campus reserve an area of land (not exceeding 24,600sqm) for the construction of infrastructure to serve the Park and Ride scheme and to make the land and access available to SYPTE prior to first occupation (or a later time to be agreed with the Council) – to cater for a minimum of 500 car parking spaces but potential for 1000 spaces. (iii) To submit to the Council for approval a scheme for public access to the Park and Ride and the provision of a transport hub for Park and Ride. (iv) A commuted sum totalling £800,000 toward the proposed transport interchange / park and ride facility payable upon confirmation of appointment of the contractor to undertake the works on behalf of the SYPTE. Such contribution only to be paid if they have not already been paid under the terms of planning permission of the development of Waverley New Community. (v) Prior to the first occupation of the office campus a financial contribution not exceeding £25,000 towards the provision of local bus stops. (vi) In the event that any transport interchange in the immediate vicinity of the site (including provision in line with the agreed ‘do minimum’ bus stop provision) does not proceed a financial contribution of £300,000 per year for up to five years following occupation of office gross floorspace over and above 10,000 square metres as a contribution towards alternative public transport provision. (vii) A financial contribution of £120,000 toward the cost of improvement works to Junction 34 of the M1 to be triggered

150 upon the letting of the construction contract for the whole of the Junction 34 improvement works by Sheffield City Council. (viii) Prior to the first occupation of development the submission of a strategy to enable local people to access subsequent job opportunities arising from the development of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local planning Authority.

B. That consequent upon the satisfactory conclusion of such an agreement, planning permission be granted for the proposed development, subject to the summary reasons for grant and conditions detailed below.

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

1. Having regard to the Development Plan and all other relevant material considerations as set out below:

a) Development Plan RSS

(i) YH1 ‘Overall Approach and Key Spatial Strategies’ seeks to transform the economic, environmental and social conditions in the Regeneration Priority Areas which includes the older industrialised parts of South Yorkshire

(ii) YH4 ‘ Regional Cities and Sub-Regional Cities and Towns’ are identified as the prime focus for housing, employment, shopping, leisure, education, health and cultural activities and facilities in the region; they should be attractive places to live and work and accessible by public transport and other modes of transport are important.

(iii) YH7 ‘Location of Development’ states that first priority should be for the re-use of previously developed land and buildings.

(iv) SY1 ‘South Yorkshire Sub Area Policy’ states that most developments should be focused on Sheffield and the sub regional towns, including Rotherham.

(v) ENV1 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ refers to reducing the causes of flooding to existing and future development.

(vi) ENV3 ‘Water Quality’ promotes a high standard of water quality in the region; prevents development that would cause pollution of water and promotes for adequate sewerage infrastructure.

151

(vii) ENV5 ‘Energy’ will maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increases in renewable energy capacity through orientation and layout of development; maximising the use of combined heat and power; community heating opportunities supporting the use of clean coal technologies and abatement measures.

(viii) ENV8 ‘Biodiversity’ will safeguard and enhance biodiversity and geological heritage, and ensure that the natural environment functions as an integrated network of habitats.

(ix) E2 ‘ Town Centre and Major Facilities’ indicates that the centres of regional cities and sub regional cities and towns should be the focus for offices, retail, leisure, entertainment, arts, culture, tourism and more intensive sport and recreation.

(x) E3 ‘Land and Premises for Economic Development’ aims to locate economic development on previously developed land and current land allocations.

Local Planning Policy in the UDP

(i) EC1.1 ‘Safeguarding Existing Industrial and Business Areas’ seeks to support proposals which safeguard the viability of established industrial and business areas.

(ii) EC3.1 ‘Land Identified for Industrial and Business Uses’ identifies that uses falling within Classes B1, B2 and B8 will be acceptable within areas allocated for industrial and business use.

(i) EC4 ‘Service Sector Employment’ states that the Council will safeguard and encourage service sector employment subject to no adverse impacts on character of the area or on residential amenity and that adequate arrangements for parking are made.

(ii) ENV2 ‘Conserving the Environment’ looks to ensure that development takes into account the impact on wildlife and historic and geological resources.

(vii) ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ aims to ensure that development should not be at the expense of the local environment and the character and appearance of the area. The Policy aims to achieve environmental improvements through an appropriate standard of design, layout and landscaping.

152

(viii) ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ seeks to minimise the impact of development on the environment and look to protect it from, for example, pollution or flooding. It also states that development leading to a significant loss of trees will be permitted only where there is compelling justification for doing so.

(ix) ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ aims to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development.

(x) ENV4.3 ‘Unstable Land’ states that developments will need to demonstrate that any potential for ground instability has been investigated.

(xi) ENV4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’ requires the applicant to undertake contamination surveys and recommend measures to treat/remove any contamination identified, on land which may be contaminated by previous industrial uses.

(ix) T6 ‘Location and Layout of Development’ aims to locate development close to public transport, discourage development which causes traffic congestion and promote safe and convenient access for pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities, as well as ensuring highway safety for car and public transport users.

Other relevant material planning considerations

(i) PPS1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development; sets out the overarching planning policies on delivery of sustainable development through the planning system. Sustainable development is defined as the core principal underpinning planning and incorporates strong, vibrant and sustainable communities; protection and enhancement of the environment; prudent use of natural resources; and sustainable economic development.

(ii) Supplement to PPS1 ’Planning and Climate Change’ sets out how planning, in providing for the new homes, jobs and infrastructure needed by communities, should help shape places with lower carbon emissions and be resilient to the climate change now accepted as inevitable.

(iii) Planning Policy Statement 4: ‘Planning for Sustainable Economic Development’ sets out how planning bodies should, in the wider context of delivering sustainable

153 development, positively plan for sustainable economic growth and respond to the challenges of the global economy, in their plan policies and planning decisions.

(iv) PPS9 ‘Biodiversity and Geological Conservation’ aims, amongst other things, to protect and enhance biodiversity as part of the development proposals.

(v) PPG13 ‘Transport’ aims to increase the use of modes of transport other than the car, increase accessibility to jobs and services and reduce road traffic in the interests of sustainability and the environment.

(vi) PPG14 ‘Development on Unstable Land’ advises Local Authorities, land owners and developers on development on land which is unstable or is potentially unstable. To ensure that development is suitable and any physical constraints on land are taken into account at all stages of planning.

(vii) PPS22 ‘Renewable Energy’ sets out how by facilitating renewable energy developments, planning can contribute to the Government’s sustainable development strategy.

(viii) PPS23 ‘Planning and Pollution Control’ advises that any consideration of the quality of land, air or water and potential impacts arising from development, possibly leading to impacts on health, is capable of being a material planning consideration.

(ix) PPS25 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ aims to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and to direct development away from areas at highest risk.

(x) RMBC Employment Land Review 2007 sets out a review of Rotherham’s local economy. Amongst other things it shows that following a period of decline Rotherham’s economy has seen a general improvement since 2001.

2. For the following reasons:

It is considered that the proposed development accords with RSS Policies SY1 ‘South Yorkshire Sub Policy Area’ and E3 ‘Land and Premises for Economic Development in that that it provides a new office campus for Government office workers in Rotherham and supports the development of public services. In addition, the proposal is considered to comply with UDP Policies EC3.1 ‘Land identified for Industrial and Business Use’, which supports a B1 Use as proposed.

154

In terms of National Policy PPS4, it is considered that the proposal accords with the key aims of this national policy document in that it pursues economic development together with providing environmental improvements by developing a currently vacant site with a high quality purpose built office development. The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed development is of an appropriate scale; that no other sites are available in Rotherham, Sheffield, Doncaster or Barnsley town centres, the development will not have a detrimental impact on these town and city centres and that the site is accessible by public transport. Improvements to public transport provision, which may include improving the existing services or by contributing towards the provision of a park and ride facility to deliver bus rapid transit will ensure that the reliance upon single occupancy car use will be reduced in accordance with PPG13 and the provision of pedestrian links to and from this facility will ensure attractive pedestrian accessibility for all.

The proposals therefore accord with the Development Plan and there are no other material considerations which indicate otherwise.

3. The forgoing statement is a summary of the main considerations leading to the decision to grant planning permission . More detailed information may be obtained from the Planning Officer’s report; the application case files and associated documents.

Conditions Imposed:

01 Applications for the approval of all the reserved matters for all phases shall be made to the local planning authority before the expiration of 10 (Ten) years from the date of this permission.

02 The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of 10 (Ten) years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of 2 (Two) years from the date of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later.

03 The first occupation of any B1(a) office phase of development and/or building hereby permitted shall be limited to users wholly engaged in the provision of regional authority and government services and/or national government services (including outsourced support services provided by private sector business support organisations and/or consultants who are wholly engaged in undertaking government work on contract) and/or other B1(a) users occupying floorspace not exceeding 17% of the total gross floorspace of that phase of development or building. The occupation of the development by the users defined above shall remain in force for a time-period of four years following the date of first occupation of that phase of development and/or building.

155

PHASING & DESIGN CODE

04 Each reserved matters application shall be accompanied by a phasing plan detailing how that phase of development will relate and interact with previous and future phases of development. It will also provide illustrative details of future phases and wherever relevant how the development will interface with future adjoining land uses.

05 No development shall take place in any of the phases identified in the approved Phasing Plan as required in Condition 4 of this approval until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a design code. The design code shall be approved for the entire development before the submission of the first of the Reserved Matters application. The design code shall be in accordance with the principles described and illustrated in the Design and Access Statement (October 2009).

06 Applications for the approval of the reserved matters shall be in accordance with the approved design code.

07 The design code shall provide details for all matters listed below:

• Building Heights • Boundary Treatments including positions, designs, materials and types • Feature Spaces • Architectural and Sustainable Construction Principles • Relationship between proposed Landscape and Built Form • Advanced Structure Planting Works • Adoptable Footpath and Bridleway Links • Security Principles

08 No more than 35,000 square metres of gross B1(a) floor area shall be occupied until a scheme setting out the provision and timescales for public art is submitted and approved in writing by the LPA. The approved scheme shall then be implemented in accordance with that scheme. 09 No more than 60,000 square metres of gross floor area of the site shall be B1(a) office development. 10 No more than 4,000 square metres of gross floor area of the site shall be used as a hotel, unless agreed otherwise, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.

11

156 The hotel shall not be first open to trade until a minimum of the first 12,200 square metres of commercial development are occupied on site. 12 The retail and leisure development hereby approved shall not open to trade until the first 12,000 square metres of B1(a) office floorspace is occupied.

13 Floorspace within use classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 and D1 and D2 hereby approved shall not exceed 500 square metres. The Use Classes are those set out in the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification.

BREEAM

14 The 60,000 square metres of B1(a) floorspace hereby approved shall be designed to achieve a BREEAM Excellent rating as a minimum. Relevant applications for approval of Reserved Matters shall be accompanied by a BREEAM Report which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The buildings shall subsequently be developed in accordance with the approved details.

A sustainability report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval with each subsequent reserved matters application which reviews the above mentioned standards and considers whether the sustainability measures should be enhanced in the light of relevant local, regional and national policy at that time. The report shall include details of how the above mentioned standards are to be achieved and of any additional sustainability enhancements as agreed. The approved details shall then be implemented.

MATERIALS

15 No development shall take place in each phase of development as identified in the approved Phasing Plan submitted pursuant to condition 4 above until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. These samples shall be submitted in accordance with the approved design code hereby referred to in Condition 4 of this approval.

16 In accordance with the development hereby approved, prospectively adoptable footpaths, cycleways and bridleway links shall be incorporated into the future development of this site. The details of the routes, widths, surfaces, furniture and landscape screening for each phase of development shall be provided to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing, the

157 approved details shall be implemented concurrently with the carrying out of that phase of development.

LANDSCAPING

17 Prior to the commencement of any works on site, details of a scheme of advance planting to provide screen planting to site boundaries and structure planting along access roads and associated with key entrances and junctions shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The said planting shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details:

i. Prior to the first occupation of the part or phase of development to which the screen relates: or ii. In accordance with an implementation timetable agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

This planting shall be maintained for a minimum period of 5 years following contractual practical completion of the part or phase of development to which it relates, and any failures replaced in accordance with condition 18 of this approval.

18 All applications for the approval of reserved matters shall have regard to the Landscape and Public Realm Strategy Plan approved under this consent and shall include a detailed landscape scheme. Such scheme shall be prepared to a minimum scale of 1:200 and shall clearly describe: • The extent of any changes to existing ground levels, where these are proposed. • Any constraints in the form of existing or proposed site services, or visibility requirements. • Areas of structural and ornamental planting that are to be carried out. • The positions, design, materials and type of any boundary treatment to be erected. • A planting plan and schedule detailing the proposed species, siting, quality and size specification, and planting distances. • A written specification for ground preparation and soft landscape works. • The programme for implementation. • Written details of the responsibility for maintenance and a schedule of operations, including replacement planting that will be carried out for a period of 5 years after completion of the planting scheme.

The scheme shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved landscape scheme within a timescale agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.

19

158 Tree planting along the Highfield Lane Boundary Boulevard and Main (axial) Boulevard shall comprise 20-25cms girth container grown semi-mature trees. Trees of the same size and quality specification shall be included and in key locations within the proposed tree planting of the Open Landscape and Buffer Landscape Areas shown on the Landscape and Public Realm Strategy Plan, including Semi-private Gardens and Drop-off Points, where agreed with the Local Planning Authority. As a minimum the trees shall be prepared, supplied and transplanted in accordance with B.S. 4043.

20 All planting, seeding and/or turfing forming part of the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of the building(s) or the completion of that part or phase of development to which it relates, whichever is the sooner. All hard landscaping included in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out before the completion or first occupation of the part or phase of development to which it relates, whichever is the sooner.

21 Any plants or trees which within a period of 5 years from completion of planting die, are removed or damaged, or that fail to thrive shall be replaced. Assessment of requirements for replacement planting shall be carried out on an annual basis in September of each year and any defective work or materials discovered shall be rectified before 31st December of that year.

22 Each relevant reserved matters application shall be accompanied by a report which shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority setting out the measures to incorporate green roofs in the design as part of proposals for storm water retention and attenuation, energy conservation and biodiversity gain. Thereafter the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

23 A landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape and public realm areas shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the completion or first occupation of the part or phase of development to which it relates, whichever is the sooner. The management shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the agreed management scheme.

24 A schedule of landscape maintenance for a minimum period of five years following completion of each phase of development as identified in the Design and Access Statement dated October 2009 shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and shall include details of the arrangements for its implementation. The maintenance shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the agreed maintenance scheme.

159 25 Prior to the commencement of development, an assessment of current nature conservation value of the application site shall be undertaken and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The results of the assessment, including recommendations for necessary mitigation and biodiversity enhancement, must be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the details of the assessment. Proposals for mitigation and biodiversity enhancement should reflect the wider Waverley development scheme’s capacity to incorporate sustainable development and biodiversity gain.

HIGHWAYS 26 No office floorspace above a maximum limit of 10,000sqm gross floorspace shall be occupied until a transport interchange within the vicinity of the site has been provided and is open for use in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

27 No buildings on site shall be occupied until details of the proposed dualling of B6533 Poplar Way and improvement to the B6533 Poplar Way/ B6066 Highfield Spring/B6066 Poplar Way Roundabout, indicated in draft form on plan No. SK-J2/3-M1 Rev P2 (submitted with planning application RB2004/0046) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority together with a timetable for implementation and the approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed timetable.

28 No buildings on site shall be occupied until details of the proposed improvements to Highfield Spring, including the provision of a “Pegasus” crossing, indicated in draft form on plan No. H-WYG-PL-02 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority together with a timetable for implementation and the approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed timetable.

29 No buildings on site shall be occupied until details of the proposed improvements to the A630 Parkway/B6533 Poplar Way/Europa Way junction, indicated in draft form on plan No. SK-J2/J3 – M1 Rev P2 (submitted with planning application RB2004/0046), shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority together with a timetable for implementation and the approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed timetable.

30 No buildings on site shall be occupied until details of the improvement of B6066 Highfield Spring/Brunel Way (AMP North) junction, as indicated in draft form on plan No. H-WYG-PL-03 have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority together with a timetable for

160 implementation and the approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed timetable.

31 No buildings on site shall be occupied until details of the improvement of B6066 Highfield Spring/AMP South, indicated in draft form on plan No. SK0001, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority together with a timetable for implementation and the approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed timetable.

32 No buildings on site shall be occupied until details of the improvement of B6066 Poplar Way/B6066 Orgreave Road junction, as indicated in draft form on plan No. H-WYG-PL-09, including conversion to signal control and widening to two lanes on the Poplar Way approach, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority together with a timetable for implementation and the approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed timetable.

33 Details of the proposed spine road and link road indicated on plan H-WTG- PL-08 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the construction of any buildings on site together with a timetable for implementation and the approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed timetable.

34 The proposed on site highway network shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the guide “Better Places to Work in South Yorkshire” and “Manual for Streets” (or any replacement documents).

35 Levels of car parking provision for each phase and every phase of office development hereby approved shall not exceed a ratio of 1 space per 40 square metres gross floorspace. Levels of car parking provision for the proposed hotel and mixed use elements shall be in accordance with the Council’s Interim Parking Standards 2002 (or any subsequent standards formally adopted to replace those standards.

36 Prior to the commencement of development hereby approved, a scheme shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority detailing how the use of sustainable transport will be encouraged. The agreed details shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

37 Before the proposed development is brought into use, a Travel Plan shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include clear and unambiguous objectives, modal split targets

161 together with a programme of implementation, monitoring, validation and regular review and improvement. The Local Planning Authority shall be informed of and give prior approval in writing to any subsequent improvements or modifications to the Travel Plan following submission of progress performance reports as time tabled in the monitoring programme. For further information please contact the Transportation Unit (01709) 822186.

38 Each reserved matters application shall be accompanied by details of cycle parking facilities in accordance with the Council’s Cycle Parking Guidelines and the approved details shall be implemented before the development is brought into use.

39 Before the development is commenced road sections, constructional and drainage details for that phase of development shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

FLOOD RISK & DRAINAGE

40 The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) by White Young Green dated 06/10/09 including the following specific measures detailed within the Flood Risk Assessment:

3) Areas of the site covered by Flood Zones 2 and 3 are developed with acceptable water compatible development only, as defined by Table D2 of PPS25 (as stated on p.18 of the FRA) 4) Finished floor levels are set at a minimum of 150mm above adjacent finished ground levels (as stated on p.18 of the FRA)

41 The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as details of potential overland flood routes through the site (detailed flood routes) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Each reserved matters application shall include details of the overland flood routes for the geographical phase in question and a scheme detailing how safe access and egress within and to the outside of the site during a flood event will be achieved.

Thereafter the scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.

42 No development except that associated with site preparation works, shall take place or discharge to a drainage system, until the detailed design of the

162 Surface Water Drainage scheme (including appropriate SUDS), including all relevant flood risk assessments within the wider Waverley development, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme as approved for each geographical phase of development shall be in accordance with the Outline Surface Water Strategy and the Flood Risk Assessment submitted with the application in November 2009 and shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of buildings within that phase of development.

The scheme shall also include the following: 5. Details of the development surface water drainage network, which shall include: o the piped drainage network and open watercourses will drain to the attenuation reservoirs. o the reservoirs will limit discharge to the River Rother at the maximum rate of 5 litre per second per hectare. o the open watercourses shall be designed for the 1 in 100 year return period over the critical storm duration (plus an allowance of 30 % for climate change) and 600 mm freeboard for each watercourse. o the piped drainage network will be designed so that there is no flooding during a 1 in 30 year storm over the critical storm duration. o the water velocity within the open watercourses shall be a maximum of 3 metres per second, unless otherwise agreed by the Environment Agency. o Appropriate SUDS will be incorporated into the surface water drainage scheme within the site. 6. Plans to show the catchment areas for surface water runoff within the site and surrounding areas, for each phase of the development (to ensure that there is adequate capacity for discharge of surface water runoff within each section of the drainage system, during and after completion of the development). 7. Details of how the current restoration drainage will fit within the proposed development drainage plans and the Masterplan, in particular Handsworth Beck and drainage channels C and C2. 8. Details of how the scheme shall be maintained and managed during and after the completion of the development. This should also include details of satisfactory easement strips along the piped network and open watercourses, to allow access for maintenance.

ENVIRONMENTAL

43 Throughout the construction phases of development and except in case of emergency, no operation that is likely to give rise to noise nuisance or loss of amenity shall take place on site other than between the hours of 0800 to 1800 Monday to Friday and between 0800 to 1300 on Saturdays.

163 Operations which give rise to noise nuisance shall not be carried out on Sundays, Public Holidays or outside normal weekday working hours. At times when operations are not permitted work shall be limited to maintenance and servicing of plant or other work of an essential or emergency nature. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified at the earliest opportunity of the occurrence of any such emergency and a schedule of essential work shall be provided.

44 Throughout the construction phases of development all machinery and vehicles employed on the site shall be fitted with effective silencers of a type appropriate to their specification and at all times the best practicable means shall be employed to prevent or counteract the effects of noise emitted by vehicles, plant, machinery or otherwise arising from on-site activities.

45 The operator shall install and thereafter utilise as appropriate, wheel washing facilities on the site for the duration of the construction. Prior to its installation on site, full details of its specification and siting shall be first agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

46 Throughout the construction phases of development all vehicles reversing warning alarm systems shall be operated in accordance with a specification submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development. At all times, effective means shall be employed to prevent and counteract the effects of audible warning alarms to nearby noise sensitive receptors. No audible warning alarm shall exceed the ambient noise level in the working location by more than 5dBA.

47 Throughout the construction phases of development prior to the commencement of site operations the operator shall nominate a qualified person to be responsible for immediate investigation of complaints. Prior to the commencement of the operations the Local Planning Authority shall be informed of the appointment, and the arrangements to be employed shall be agreed. A log of all complaints shall be kept and made available on request to the Local Planning Authority.

48 Prior to the commencement of site operations and development on site the operator shall submit a scheme to control dust emissions, and their effect on surrounding residential premises, for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall include for routine visual assessments, specify those staff able to make decisions as to the obtaining of any plant or equipment required for dust suppression, and a protocol to investigate complaints.

49

164 At such times during construction of development when due to site conditions the prevention of dust nuisance by these means is considered by the Local Planning Authority in consultations with the site operator to be impracticable, then movements of soils, overburden and other dust raising materials shall be temporarily curtailed until such time as the site/weather conditions improve such as to permit a resumption of the operations.

50 Throughout the construction phases of development the operator shall install and thereafter utilise as appropriate, wheel washing facilities on the site for the duration of the construction. Prior to its installation on site, full details of its specification and siting shall be first agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons for Conditions: 01 To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

02 To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

03 Permission for this development would not have been granted for a speculative office development of this scale, but for the special requirements of the Applicant.

04 To ensure that high standards of urban design and comprehensively planned development, designed and phased to ensure maximum integration between different land uses to accord with policies ENV 3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ and ENV 3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ of the adopted UDP (adopted June 1999).

05 To ensure that high standards of urban design and comprehensively planned development, designed and phased to ensure maximum integration between different land uses to accord with policies ENV 3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ and ENV 3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ of the adopted UDP (adopted June 1999).

06 To ensure that high standards of urban design and comprehensively planned development, designed and phased to ensure maximum integration between different land uses to accord with policies ENV 3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ and ENV 3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ of the adopted UDP (adopted June 1999).

07

165 To ensure that high standards of urban design and comprehensively planned development, designed and phased to ensure maximum integration between different land uses to accord with policies ENV 3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ and ENV 3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ of the adopted UDP (adopted June 1999).

08 To secure improvements to the local environment and to comply with policy ENV3.1 of the adopted UDP.

09 To ensure that the site is not developed for more than 60,000 square metres of office use which was proposed and assessed in the application in relation to the relevant Government Guidance contained within Planning Policy Statement 4 ‘Planning for Sustainable Economic Development’.

10 To ensure that the site is not developed for more than 4,000 square metres to be used as a hotel which was proposed and assessed in the application in relation to the relevant Government Guidance contained within Planning Policy Statement 6 ‘Planning for Town Centres’.

11 To ensure that the development is phased properly to allow the site to be developed for a B1(a) office campus development.

12 To ensure that the development is phased properly to allow the site to be developed for a B1(a) office campus development.

13 The outline planning application proposed 500 square metres of floorspace within classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, D1 and D2 which the Council considers sufficient to achieve the objectives of RET6 ‘Local Shopping Provision’ of the adopted Rotherham UDP (adopted June 1999).

14 In order to secure a sustainable development in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 1 ‘Creating Sustainable Communities’ and Regional Spatial Strategy YH2.

15 To ensure that appropriate materials are used in the construction of the development in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.1 'Development and the Environment'.

16 To ensure adequate pedestrian and cycle links and recreational use throughout the site.

166 17 In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘ Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’.

18 To ensure that there is a well laid out scheme of healthy trees and shrubs in the interests of amenity and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’.

19 In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’.

20 To ensure that there is a well laid out scheme of healthy trees and shrubs in the interests of amenity and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’.

21 To ensure that there is a well laid out scheme of healthy trees and shrubs in the interests of amenity and in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3 ‘Borough Landscape’, ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’, ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development and ENV3.4 ‘Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows’.

22 In order to secure a sustainable development in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 1 ‘Creating Sustainable Communities’ and Regional Spatial Strategy Policy YH1.

23 To ensure that due regard is paid to the continuing enhancement and maintenance of amenity afforded by landscape features of communal, public and biodiversity significance.

24 To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by the proper maintenance of existing and / or new landscape features.

25 In the interests of mitigating the ecological impact of the development in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 9 ‘Biodiversity and Geological Conservation’.

26

167 In order to promote sustainable transport choices.

27 In the interests of highway safety.

28 In the interests of highway safety.

29 In the interests of highway safety.

30 In the interests of highway safety.

31 In the interests of highway safety.

32 In the interests of highway safety.

33 In the interests of highway safety.

34 No details have been submitted as they are reserved for approval.

35 In the interests of sustainable travel and to ensure the provision of appropriate car parking provision for employees and visitors to the site.

36 In order to promote sustainable transport choices.

37 In order to promote sustainable transport choices.

38 In order to promote sustainable transport choices.

39 In the interests of highway safety.

FLOOD RISK & DRAINAGE

40 To reduce the impact and risk of flooding on the proposed development and future occupants.

168 41 To reduce the impact and risk of flooding on the proposed development and future occupants. To ensure safe access and egress from the site.

42 To prevent the increased risk of flooding and ensure future maintenance of the surface water drainage system both within each phase of development and within the Waverley development.

ENVIRONMENTAL

43 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

44 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

45 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

46 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

47 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

48 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

49 In the interests of the amenity of the locality and in accordance with UDP Policy ENV3.7 'Control of Pollution'.

50 In order to ensure the development does not give rise to problems of mud/material deposit on the adjoining public highway in the interests of road safety.

INFORMATIVES

Transport interchange In relation to condition 24 above a transport interchange shall be defined as facilities to enable the ability to change between modes of transport and/or

169 public transport services including provision for bus travel, cyclists, pedestrians and car parking.

Highway Improvements All highway improvements identified require detailed design and road safety audits, accordingly the final layout may vary from those shown on the draft layouts submitted as part of the application. The detailed designs will need to consider giving priority to the Bus Rapid Transit service.

Advice to applicant: In England, it is a legal requirement to have a site waste management plan (SWMP) for all new construction projects worth more than £300,000.The level of detail that your SWMP should contain depends on the estimated build cost, excluding VAT. You must still comply with the duty of care for waste. Because you will need to record all waste movements in one document, having a SWMP will help you to ensure you comply with the duty of care. Further information can be found at http://www.netregs-swmp.co.uk

Advice to applicant : in accordance with the waste hierarchy, the applicant must consider reduction, reuse and recovery of waste in preference to off site incineration and disposal to landfill during site construction.

Advice to applicant: If any controlled waste is to be removed off site, then site operator must ensure a registered waste carrier is used to convey the waste material off site to a suitably authorised facility.

If the operator wishes more specific advice they will need to contact the Environment Management Team at our Rotherham Office on 01709 312890 or look at available guidance on our website www.environment- agency.gov.uk/subjects/waste/

Advice to applicant : The Duty of Care regulations for dealing with waste materials are applicable for any off-site movements of wastes. The developer as waste producer therefore has a duty of care to ensure all materials removed go to an appropriate licensed disposal site and all relevant documentation is completed and kept in line with regulations.

It is unclear if the applicant intends to use waste for any landscaping activities on site but if they do the following advice should be noted:

Advice to applicant : If any waste is to be used on site, the applicant will be required to obtain the appropriate exemption or authorisation from the Environment Agency.

170

171 Background

There are a number of previous planning applications relating to the application site. These are detailed as follows:

RB1993/1058 Extraction of coal by opencast methods together with all ancillary operations (car park, plant yard, temporary offices, water treatment areas and sewerage treatment facilities), the creation and use of waste – Granted 21/12/94 – Subject of a legal agreement.

RB2000/1436 Outline application for the development of first phase of advanced technology park including uses in class B1, offices, research and development/industry – Granted 07/03/01 – Subject of a legal agreement.

RB2003/0046 Outline application for development of advanced manufacturing park including business uses in classes B1 & B2 with related infrastructure and landscaping – Granted 06/04/05 – Subject of a legal agreement.

RB2003/1640 Continuation of opencast coal and reclamation operations without compliance with condition 2 of planning permission R93/1058P dated 21/12/94, together with revisions to approved restoration contours – Granted 01/07/04 – Subject of a legal agreement.

RB2004/1571 Oultine application for B1 (Business), B2 (General Industrial), B8 (Storage and Distribution), hotel, railway station and ancillary leisure & retail development including details of the means of access – Granted 28/01/08 – Subject of a legal agreement.

Environmental Impact

The proposed development falls within Schedule 2 paragraph 10 (b) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (the EIA Regulations) as an ‘urban development project’ on an area over 0.5 hectares.

The proposed development is considered to have the potential to give rise to significant environmental effects, including cumulative effects in combination with the adjacent Waverley development. Accordingly, the proposed development is regarded as ‘EIA development’ and is the subject of an environmental impact assessment (EIA) under the EIA regulations.

Site Description & Location The application site is approximately 20 hectares in area and is located within the wider site known as Waverley. The Waverley site comprises of approximately 300 hectares and is subject to a separate planning application for a new community, comprising approximately 4,000 new homes, 2 primary schools, various retail, leisure and community uses as well as a large expanse of open space to the south of the site. Essentially, Waverley has been split into four principal components on the masterplan that comprise of the Advanced Manufacturing Park (AMP), Highfield Commercial, the new

172 community, and the open space. The 40 hectare AMP site has the benefit of planning permission and there are approximately 50% of units constructed and occupied on site at present. The entire Waverley site is owned by a single land owner, UK Coal.

This outline application relates to the Highfield Commercial area of Waverley, which is the last remaining area of land within the Waverley site currently allocated in the UDP. Access to the site will be gained from Highfield Spring, which is the site’s immediate western boundary, and leads to Poplar Way to the north, which in turn leads to the A630 Sheffield Parkway.

Proposal The application is in outline with only the means of access to be considered at this stage. Details of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping are reserved for approval at reserved matters stage. The application was submitted with an indicative plan which shows the access to the site being taken from the existing roundabout on Highfield Lane/Highfield Spring.

The proposed development seeks outline consent for the following:

• Up to 60,000m² B1 office space; • 1,500 parking spaces (at a ratio of 1:40); • Up to 4,000m² hotel (120 bedrooms) with 120 parking spaces for guests and staff; • Up to 500m² ancillary retail and leisure floorspace; and • Means of access from Highfield Spring.

The floorspace areas represent the maximum quantum of the proposed development and will not be exceeded. It is proposed to provide a high quality Government Office campus of regional significance in line with the recent change in Government policy to relocate services from the south east and London into the regions.

Whilst the application is in outline form, an indicative masterplan and elevational drawings have been submitted as part of the application. These show the site divided into two campuses, separated by a main access road to Waverley New Community (WNC). The layout is based on the loose grid system of the WNC and provides a strong frontage to this larger site.

Generally, building heights will range from 3 to 4 storey. The higher buildings are located to the north eastern part of the site. Each office block varies in size from 5,225m² to 10,230m², all based on a maximum depth of 15 metres. The proposals also include provision for up to 1,620 car parking spaces which will serve both the offices and the proposed hotel.

Planting is proposed along the main frontages to screen the buildings and the car parking areas. A buffer zone has been provided along the western edge of the application site south of the main access route. It is also proposed that the eastern edge will be planted with semi mature trees to provide a soft

173 buffer. Internal green spaces are also proposed as ‘courtyards’ to each office block.

Due to the scale of the development a phasing plan is proposed which illustrates that the development could be constructed in 6 phases. The first phases will include office, retail, parking and structure planting in the central part of the site, with later phases including the hotel.

The following documents have been submitted in support of the planning application:

• Planning Statement: The Planning Statement indicates that the proposed development is intended to serve as a Government campus office development in line with the Government’s policy of relocating Government offices outside London. It concludes that the proposals are in accordance with National policies and the Development Plan comprising Regional and Local Plan Policies. It goes on to state that the site is sustainable in terms of its location and accessibility and any significant effects arising as part of the development scheme in relation to traffic, access, noise, landscape, air quality, flooding and drainage can be mitigated.

• Design and Access Statement (as Amended): The Design and Access Statement explains how the proposed development will improve the character and quality of the site and the way it functions in relation to existing and proposed development, in accordance with PPS1. The document concludes that the site is well located in terms of the transport network and the commercial uses will compliment and enhance the exemplar high tech development at the AMP. The proposal will also provide a high quality commercial development that is attractive to the market and will be energy efficient and of high architectural quality.

• PPS6 Statement (as Amended – June 2009) and later Addendum: This assessment considers the proposals in the context of the advice contained within PPS6. The assessment concludes that there is clear quantitative and qualitative need for the B1(a) office floorspace and hotel accommodation proposed. A sequential site assessment identifies that no sites were identified which were available, suitable or viable to accommodate the proposed campus style development for Government offices. Finally the impact assessment demonstrates that the proposals will not materially affect the vitality and viability of the surrounding centres of Rotherham or Sheffield, furthermore it is of an appropriate scale to meet the specific needs for commercial floorspace in a campus style format.

• Environmental Statement Technical Appendices containing:

• Validation Report:

174 The validation report appraises the geo-environmental and geotechnical aspects of the site and provides an assessment of the site’s suitability for its proposed future use. The report concludes that further monitoring of ground deformation and groundwater behaviour is implemented and the interaction between the two is progressively assessed as detailed infrastructure and building development design and construction proceeds.

• Socio Economics: The report assesses the likely significant social and economic effects of the proposed development. It concludes by stating that the cumulative effects of the proposed development and other development in the area will have a substantial long term beneficial effect at the local, district, regional, national and international scale.

• Landscape and Visual Assessment: The assessment identifies, describes and evaluates the existing landscape and views on the application site and the surrounding area and assesses the likely significant effects of the proposed development. It concludes by stating that the cumulative visual effects will mostly be confined to local residents living in close proximity to the application site (minor adverse) and officer workers at the AMP development (minor adverse).

• Transport Assessment (As Amended): The Transport Assessment assesses the likely effect of the proposed development in relation to traffic, public transport, walking and cycling. It concludes that the proposed development will lead to some increases in traffic on the local highway network once built and occupied, however a green travel plan will seek to mitigate this effect, by encouraging users to consider more sustainable modes of transport. There is currently spare capacity on the existing bus service to accommodate demand for public transport use to and from the application site and therefore the effect on existing bus services was assessed as negligible.

• Travel Plan (As Amended): The Travel Plan is a package of measures tailored to meet the needs of the site. The primary objective is to reduce the reliance on single person occupancy car use by promoting realistic alternatives, particularly through public transport. The current development proposals offers potential for car trips to be transferred to other more sustainable modes including car share, public transport, walking and cycling due to facilities and existing links situated near to the development site. The success of the plan will be measured against pre-arranged indicators, such as car club participation, bus passenger numbers or simple traffic counts. Targets for each indicator will be set and achievement of those targets will be monitored through a programme of ongoing surveys.

175 • Air Quality (As Amended in Addendum to ES Main Text October 2009): The assessment considers emissions from road traffic and combustion plant as part of the proposed development and concludes that following site specific assessments, levels of nitrogen dioxide are forecast to be above the Air Quality Objectives in some areas, whether or not the proposed development goes ahead. A negligible or slight adverse impact is therefore forecast to occur in these areas.

• Noise and Vibration: This report assesses the likely significant effects of the proposed development on receptors sensitive to noise and vibration. The assessment concludes that there will be no or little change in noise on the existing roads in and around the application site as a result of the proposed development. Noise from the construction phase has the potential to cause some disturbance, however suitable mitigation will minimise any adverse effects upon the local environment.

• Flood Risk Assessment (dated 6 th November 2009): This report identifies the site as being within Flood Zone 1 as defined by the Environment Agency; therefore the risk of flooding is low. The report concludes by stating that the site will not flood from the River Rother, groundwater or sewers. It goes on to state that surface water run off will not increase post development and climate change has been accounted for, therefore the development will not be at risk from the effects of climate change.

• Ecology: This report identifies and assesses the likely ecological effects associated with the proposed development and concludes by stating that it will have a major beneficial effect in the long term through enhancing opportunities for wildlife across the site.

• Surface Water Drainage Strategy (dated 17 th September 2009): The report concludes that a surface water drainage network can be provided that will accommodate the surface water run off from the Helical Governetz and new community developments. The network will utilise a series of drainage measures including adoptable sewers, open watercourses and reservoirs to convey the surface water to the attenuation reservoirs prior to discharge at a limited rate into the River Rother.

• Statement of Community Involvement: This statement demonstrates that Barton Willmore has undertaken a widespread programme of community consultation which has included pre application discussion with the Council and the community dating back to March 2008. Community consultation has included presentation of the proposals to statutory consultees, local community

176 groups, members of the general public and Council officials. This was undertaken at pre application, post submission and following the submission of amended information. The statement concludes that comments received have been overwhelmingly supportive of the proposed scheme.

Development Plan Allocation and Policy

RSS Policies

(i) YH1 ‘Overall Approach and Key Spatial Strategies’ seeks to transform the economic, environmental and social conditions in the Regeneration Priority Areas which includes the older industrialised parts of South Yorkshire

(ii) YH4 ‘Regional Cities and Sub-Regional Cities and Towns’ are identified as the prime focus for housing, employment, shopping, leisure, education, health and cultural activities and facilities in the region; they should be attractive places to live and work and accessible by public transport and other modes of transport are important.

(iii) YH7 ‘Location of Development’ states that first priority should be for the re-use of previously developed land and buildings.

(iv) SY1 ‘South Yorkshire Sub Area Policy’ states that most developments should be focused on Sheffield and the sub regional towns, including Rotherham.

(v) ENV1 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ refers to reducing the causes of flooding to existing and future development.

(vi) ENV3 ‘Water Quality’ promotes a high standard of water quality in the region; prevents development that would cause pollution of water and promotes adequate sewerage infrastructure.

(vii) ENV5 ‘Energy’ will maximise improvements to energy efficiency and increases in renewable energy capacity through orientation and layout of development; maximising the use of combined heat and power; community heating opportunities supporting the use of clean coal technologies and abatement measures.

(viii) ENV8 ‘Biodiversity’ will safeguard and enhance biodiversity and geological heritage, and ensure that the natural environment functions as an integrated network of habitats.

177

(ix) E2 ‘ Town Centre and Major Facilities’ indicates that the centres of regional cities and sub regional cities and towns should be the focus for offices, retail, leisure, entertainment, arts, culture, tourism and more intensive sport and recreation.

(x) E3 ‘Land and Premises for Economic Development’ aims to locate economic development on previously developed land and current land allocations.

Local Planning Policy in the UDP

(i) EC1.1 ‘Safeguarding Existing Industrial and Business Areas’ seeks to support proposals which safeguard the viability of established industrial and business areas.

(ii) EC3.1 ‘Land Identified for Industrial and Business Uses’ identifies that uses falling within Classes B1, B2 and B8 will be acceptable within areas allocated for industrial and business use.

(iii) EC4 ‘Service Sector Employment’ states that the Council will safeguard and encourage service sector employment subject to no adverse impacts on character of the area or on residential amenity and that adequate arrangements for parking are made.

(iv) ENV2 ‘Conserving the Environment’ looks to ensure that development takes into account the impact on wildlife and historic and geological resources.

(v) ENV3.1 ‘Development and the Environment’ aims to ensure that development should not be at the expense of the local environment and the character and appearance of the area. The Policy aims to achieve environmental improvements through an appropriate standard of design, layout and landscaping.

(vi) ENV3.2 ‘Minimising the Impact of Development’ seeks to minimise the impact of development on the environment and look to protect it from, for example, pollution or flooding. It also states that development leading to a significant loss of trees will be permitted only where there is compelling justification for doing so.

(vii) ENV3.7 ‘Control of Pollution’ aims to minimise the adverse effects of nuisance, disturbance and pollution associated with development.

178 (viii) ENV4.3 ‘Unstable Land’ states that developments will need to demonstrate that any potential for ground instability has been investigated.

(ix) ENV4.4 ‘Contaminated Land’ requires the applicant to undertake contamination surveys and recommend measures to treat/remove any contamination identified, on land which may be contaminated by previous industrial uses.

(x) T6 ‘Location and Layout of Development’ aims to locate development close to public transport, discourage development which causes traffic congestion and promote safe and convenient access for pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities, as well as ensuring highway safety for car and public transport users.

Other relevant material planning considerations

i. PPS1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development; sets out the overarching planning policies on delivery of sustainable development through the planning system. Sustainable development is defined as the core principal underpinning planning and incorporates strong, vibrant and sustainable communities; protection and enhancement of the environment; prudent use of natural resources; and sustainable economic development.

ii. Supplement to PPS1 ’Planning and Climate Change’ sets out how planning, in providing for the new homes, jobs and infrastructure needed by communities, should help shape places with lower carbon emissions and be resilient to the climate change now accepted as inevitable.

iii. Planning Policy Statement 4: ‘Planning for Sustainable Economic Development’ sets out how planning bodies should, in the wider context of delivering sustainable development, positively plan for sustainable economic growth and respond to the challenges of the global economy, in their plan policies and planning decisions.

iv. PPS9 ‘Biodiversity and Geological Conservation’ aims, amongst other things, to protect and enhance biodiversity as part of the development proposals.

v. PPG13 ‘Transport’ aims to increase the use of modes of transport other than the car, increase accessibility to jobs and services and reduce road traffic in the interests of sustainability and the environment.

179

vi. PPG14 ‘Development on Unstable Land’ advises Local Authorities, land owners and developers on development on land which is unstable or is potentially unstable. To ensure that development is suitable and any physical constraints on land are taken into account at all stages of planning.

vii. PPS22 ‘Renewable Energy’ sets out how by facilitating renewable energy developments, planning can contribute to the Government’s sustainable development strategy.

viii. PPS23 ‘Planning and Pollution Control’ advises that any consideration of the quality of land, air or water and potential impacts arising from development, possibly leading to impacts on health, is capable of being a material planning consideration.

ix. PPS25 ‘Development and Flood Risk’ aims to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and to direct development away from areas at highest risk.

x. RMBC Employment Land Review 2007 sets out a review of Rotherham’s local economy. Amongst other things it shows that following a period of decline Rotherham’s economy has seen a general improvement since 2001. Publicity

The application, being an EIA development has been advertised as such and as a departure from the UDP and affecting a public right of way, by press notice (in the Sheffield Telegraph, Rotherham Advertiser and Dinnington Guardian), and by site notice.

In addition, four public meetings were held in November and December 2008 at Treeton Primary School, Woodhouse Mill Working Men’s Club, Handsworth Grange School and Catcliffe Primary School where local residents were invited to view the proposals for the office development and Waverley New Community and ask questions. These meetings were attended by UK Coal and their advisors who gave presentations on the proposals for the the Highfield Commercial office development and the new community. RMBC Officers from Planning, Transportation, Drainage and Environmental Health were also in attendance to answer any technical questions posed by members of the public. Attendees were given the opportunity to complete a pro-forma prepared by RMBC and SCC which was prepared to enable the Local Authority to gain a view on public perception of the proposed development.

180 In response to this round of publicity, a total of 22 letters were received specifically relating to the Helical Governetz proposals, 6 of these raised questions relating to the need for the proposed offices, 9 objected and 2 were in support of the proposals on the grounds that the proposals will create jobs for the area. The objections raised are in the form of the following:

• No need for an additional hotel in this location • The offices should be run from renewable energy sources • Sufficient empty office space already exists in nearby industrial estates • No information has been provided relating to how foul sewerage will be dealt with • Increase in traffic congestion • Public transport should be encouraged through the imposition of a car parking charge • Increase in amount of hard standing having a detrimental impact on surface water run off • This development is a forgone conclusion despite local opposition • No guarantee that workers at Helical Governetz will live in the new community at Waverley

Orgreave Parish Council have also objected to the proposals on the grounds that the development will result in an increase in air pollution from increased traffic, there are sufficient hotels in the area, empty office space is available in the locality and foul sewerage will be pumped to Woodhouse Mill, which has insufficient capacity to cope with the extra demand.

Following amendments, the application was re-advertised on 27 th November 2009 in the local press as above and by site notice. A drop in session was also held on 23 rd November 2009 at the ITC Centre of the AMP. As a result of this publicity no letters of representation have been received specifically relating to this office development, other than one request to speak at Planning Board.

Consultations

External Consultees

Environment Agency raise no objections subject to conditions relating to flood risk, groundwater and contaminated land and pollution prevention.

Highways Agency have been attending monthly transport workstream meetings to discuss the impact of the development on the local road network and Junctions 33 and 34 of the M1. The Highways Agency do not raise any fundamental or in principle objections to the development, and are confident that outstanding issues related to the impacts on local and motorway junctions can be addressed through physical mitigation and management of traffic impacts which will be secured through conditions, the S106 agreement and S278 agreements as appropriate. The Highways Agency have indicated that they intend to continue working with RMBC and the developer to resolve the outstanding issues.

181

South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) have assessed the proposals with the requirements for the extant Highfield Commercial approval in mind. These requirements are based predominately on the provision of land for the Park and Ride Scheme which was included in the Highfield Commercial S106 Agreement.

In this respect SYPTE recommends that these requirements are transferred to this application. SYPTE would therefore wish to see the following:

• Reserve an area of land (not exceeding 24,600m2) for the construction of infrastructure to serve the Park and Ride Scheme to make the land and access available to SYPTE prior to the first occupation (or a later date to be agreed with the Council) – to cater for a minimum of 500 car parking spaces but potential for 1000 spaces. • To submit for approval a scheme for public access to the Park and Ride and the provision of a transport hub for Park and Ride. • Provision of a minimum of 2 bus stops for local services not exceeding £25,000. • In the event of the owner failing to make available land for the Park and Ride scheme, then the owner shall pay the Council the bus contribution towards the operation of A1, A2 and 123 bus services for 5 years totalling £1,500,000. • Financial contribution of £800,000 towards the provision of a public transport interchange (either to come forward from this development or the new community). • Prior to the first occupation of development the submission of a strategy to enable local people to access subsequent job opportunities arising from the development of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority

Yorkshire Forward have been consulted on the revised PPS6 statement and subsequent addendum to this. They indicate that a need to ensure that the site is principally used by national government services and a tie in for prospective tenants of Helical Governetz is required. The suggested first user condition goes some way to address this and prevents the development having a detrimental impact on Rotherham and Sheffield centres. It should also work to the mutual benefit of the adjacent AMP.

Local Government Yorkshire & Humber Assembly have been consulted on the revised PPS6 statement and subsequent addendum to this. They state that this development raises an issue with the implementation of several RSS Policies including YH4, SY1 and E2 and will need to be clearly justified in this context, given its potential to transform the economic, environmental and social conditions in the Regeneration Priority Area. To avoid harm to the implementation of RSS Policies the LGYH proposes that the Local Authority imposes a condition which controls the number and type of office units on the site so that it does not compete directly with the office market of Rotherham and Sheffield centres.

182

Yorkshire Water raise no objections to the proposals subject to conditions relating to foul and surface water drainage.

South Yorkshire Police Architectural Liaison Officer raises concerns that the Design and Access Statement does not address any aspirations to achieve Secure by Design certification and no reference of how the car parks will be managed has been provided. Consideration of these matters needs to be given at detailed design stage.

South Yorkshire Archaeology do not wish to make comments on the proposals due to the historic land use of the site.

Sheffield City Council state that the proposals are contrary to the RSS and whilst they acknowledge that the site is allocated for Industry and Business in the UDP this does not preclude the need for a PPS6 assessment. The existing River Don permission at Meadowhall is capable of accommodating all of the office floorspace applied for and so should be considered as a more favourable location in terms of the sequential test and PPS6. The proposed first user condition, which will restrict the occupation of the proposed buildings to Government departments is flawed and the flexible wording suggests that the confidence in the demand for a government campus is weak. The Need assessment is also considered to be weak in that it does not provide a complete picture of the demand for employment land in South Yorkshire. If as the Applicant proposes, the development will create 4,900 jobs, based on the figures for annual job growth in the RSS, this development will account for 41 years of job growth on its own suggesting that there is no need for such a large office scheme in PPS6 terms. Concerns are also raised regarding the need for the proposed hotel as it is considered that it will not only serve the demand likely to arise from the office development but would also meet an additional need which has not been identified. Several sites for hotels in Sheffield City Centre have been identified as being sequentially preferable.

Creative Sheffield have serious concerns about the proposals as they consider that the development will undermine Sheffield’s attempts to transform its city centre. They also consider that the proposals are contrary to Regional Spatial Strategy and PPS6 in that there is no short to medium term need for the proposed development, as current supply and the development pipeline is sufficient to meet anticipated demand. They also consider that there are better located sites that can accommodate anticipated demands from the public and private sectors and by diverting potential office occupiers away from Sheffield City Centre the scheme will have an unacceptable impact on the City’s plans to continue the regeneration of the city centre.

Natural England have commented on sustainability, transport and open space provision. In general they welcome the use of green roofs throughout the site and use of biomass CHP systems. Public transport provision should be conditioned should the provision of Bus Rapid Transport not be put into operation and the open space at the northern end of Highwall Park should be

183 designed to maximise its attractiveness for office workers as a recreation area.

South Yorkshire Mining Advisory Service has indicated that basic gas protection measures will be required in future buildings. Precautionary measures should also be taken during development work, especially works involving personnel entering deep excavations.

Internal Consultees

Streetpride - Drainage have indicated that this development and the new community are intrinsically linked when considering drainage. Their comments in this respect are therefore the same as for the new community, in that they do not raise any significant concerns regarding flood risk or surface water and foul drainage, subject to conditions

Council’s Landscape Section welcomes the revised design concept but acknowledges that this is an Outline application and details such as landscaping and the public realm are reserved for future consideration. At this stage a high quality landscape design code should be established and approved across the entire site. Conditions relating to structure planting, the submission of a detailed landscape scheme and management and maintenance plan are suggested.

Ecology have commented as follows: The Design and Access Statement in relation to sustainable development and environmental objectives are positive and welcome, however the objectives have not been evidenced. Further work in this respect is required. Furthermore the indicative masterplan includes too much parking / hard landscape, limited green corridor retention and no detail of how biodiversity gain will be created.

Neighbourhood Services – Noise raise no objections to the proposals.

Neighbourhood Services – Air Quality have considered the impact of this proposed development and the proposed new community as a whole, therefore comments made relate to both applications. Air quality at the development site is predicted to meet the Government’s health based objectives for nitrogen dioxide annual mean. Conditions to ensure that continued monitoring and the use of CHP plants are suggested to prevent unacceptable levels of air pollution.

Access Officer states that the public realm and shared spaces should be well thought out in order to address issues faced by people with disabilities and visual impairments

Transportation have assessed Transport Assessment submitted in support of the application and do not raise any objections subject to conditions and local highway junction improvements.

Appraisal

184

Where an application is made to a local planning authority for planning permission … in dealing with such an application the authority shall have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, and to any other material considerations – S70(2) TCPA 1990.

The main considerations in the determination of this planning application are: • Principle of the development; • Highways; • Landscaping; • Biodiversity and Ecology; • Sustainability and Renewable technology

Principle The application site is allocated for industrial and business use in the adopted Unitary Development Plan. The application seeks consent for development within Use Class B1(a) Offices and ancillary leisure and retail development. Therefore taken generally, the proposals for the B1(a) element of the proposed development are acceptable in land use terms.

Despite this and due to the quantum of proposed B1 (a) office space and its location out of the town centre, it is necessary to assess the proposals for offices and the hotel against Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres 2005 (PPS6), which states that a number of issues have to be addressed against criteria to establish if their location, scale and need is acceptable. Therefore notwithstanding that the proposed development is in accordance with UDP Policy EC3.1, PPS6 is a material consideration and needs to be considered.

Prior to assessing this however it is important to note that there is an extant planning permission on this site, granted in January 2008, which includes 10,000sqm of B1(a) office space and a 3,000sqm hotel. This application is significantly smaller in scale and can be implemented up until January 2011. The need, scale, impact and whether there are any other sequentially preferable sites was assessed and agreed in principle when this application was determined by Planning Board.

The current proposals therefore represent an 83% increase in B1(a) floorspace. The assessment of this application therefore relates to the floorspace over and beyond that already approved, which comprises an additional 50,000sqm of B1 (a) office space and an additional 1,000sqm of C1 Hotel space.

Regional Policy Policies YH4, E2 and E3 require the Regional Cities and Sub Regional Cities and Towns to be the focus for office, retail and leisure development whilst making use of appropriately developed land and current allocations in sustainable locations to meet the needs of a modern economy. Policy SY1 also places a particular emphasis on these centres, whilst acknowledging that

185 advanced manufacturing and related research and development should be supported at Waverley.

The site is clearly not in a town or city centre, therefore a judgement needs to be made based on evidence submitted by the applicant and information contained within relevant Employment Land Reviews.

The applicant has assessed the proposals against the tests set out in PPS6 and more information on these are provided below. In the first instance a sequential test has been performed which demonstrates that there are no sequentially preferable sites in any of the South Yorkshire towns or city centres large enough to accommodate the proposed campus development, furthermore they have also compared the application site to comparable edge of centre locations in Sheffield and Rotherham, which were all discounted on the grounds of poor transport links and multiple land ownership making delivery difficult in the short term for these reasons it is considered that the development complies with policies YH4, E2, E3 and SY1 of the RSS in that there are no other sites available within the towns or city centres capable of accommodating the proposed development.

It could also be argued that whilst this site has an extant permission for a mixture of B1, B2 and B8 uses, like many similar sites of this nature as a result of the economic downturn, the applicant has informed us that little interest has been shown by potential occupiers, although no information to support this claim has been submitted. Despite this, it is considered that the Government office campus is likely to be the only employment use that is likely to come forward on this site in the short term. Furthermore, in land use terms the campus is more compatible alongside the proposed new community and the office use will form an important transition zone between the community and the AMP that will be more sympathetic to housing than any mixed industrial/commercial business park. It is considered that if planning permission is not granted for the proposed development, the only other potential land use that may come forward would be to extend the new community, which would result in the loss of this employment site and consequently the loss of approximately 4,900 jobs which is contrary to Policy E3 of the RSS.

Other relevant policies from the Regional Spatial Strategy include the following:

Policy YH1 seeks to transform the economic, environmental and social conditions in the Regeneration Priority Areas which include the older industrial parts of South Yorkshire. These sites are not identified in the RSS, however due to the historic use of the application site it is considered that Waverley would fall within this category. The economic and environmental benefit of the proposed office development would therefore ensure that the proposals comply with the objectives of this policy.

Policy YH7 sets out the sequential approach for the allocation of sites once the distribution of development between cities and towns has been

186 determined. The focus for development should be prioritised towards “the reuse of previously developed land and buildings and the more effective use of existing developed areas within the relevant city or town …” The proposal site is previously developed land, therefore the proposals are in accordance with this policy.

Policy E3 supports the development of key sectors of the economy. The proposals to create an office campus for occupation by Government departments will support the objectives of this policy.

Local Policy As previously stated, the site at Waverley is allocated for Industry and Business in the adopted UDP, which does not preclude or limit the quantum of B1(a) floorpsace, therefore the proposals to erect 60,000sqm metres of B1 (a) office space complies with the provisions of this policy.

The policy does not however include hotel, retail or leisure uses as acceptable in this location. These uses therefore require further assessment to determine if they would act as ancillary uses to the primary office use. This is assessed in more detail below when considering the tests set out in PPS6 .

Planning Policy Statement 4 PPS4 ‘Planning for Prosperous Economies’ was published on the 29 th December 2009 and is therefore a material consideration in the determination of this application.

The PPS now replaces Planning Policy Guidance Note 4: Industrial, commercial development and small firms (PPG4, 1992), Planning Policy Guidance Note 5: Simplified Planning Zones (PPG5, 1992) which will be republished as practice guidance and Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for town centres (PPS6, 2005). Despite this and because this application was submitted prior to the publication of the PPS4, the application was accompanied by a PPS6 Statement and has been assessed against this initially as set out in the succeeding paragraphs of this report.

However in light of the new PPS, it is considered that the following points of the PPS are the most relevant in the determination of this planning application:

1. The removal of the need test; 2. The retention of the sequential test; 3. The strengthened impact test.

The removal of the ‘need test’ The guidance includes the removal of the "need test" when considering planning applications for town centre uses (including office development) outside town centres. A need assessment was provided by the agent by way of the PPS6 assessment for the planning application and an assessment of this has been made in the body of the main Planning Board Report. Removal of the need test would assist the case for the proposed development in terms

187 of not needing to demonstrate the qualitative and quantitative need for the office floor space provided.

Sequential Test PPS4 retains the "sequential test" which requires developers to justify why they cannot build in the centre before they seek to build out of centre. This appears to be very similar to the prior, PPS6 requirement to undertake a sequential assessment and would not affect the sequential assessment of the proposed development which has already been undertaken.

Impact Test The PPS also strengthens the "impact test" to focus on the potential economic, social and environmental effects of development. It is considered that the impact of the proposed development has been addressed fully and that there will not be any significant adverse impacts.

Furthermore Policies EC17 ‘The Consideration of Planning Applications for Development of main Town Centre Uses not in a Centre and not in Accordance with an Up to Date Development Plan’ and EC18 ‘Application of Car Parking Standards for Non-Residential Development’ are particularly relevant.

Policy EC17 indicates that planning applications for main town centre uses that are not in an existing centre and not in accordance with an up to date development plan should be refused where the applicant has not demonstrated compliance with the requirements of the sequential approach or there is clear evidence that the proposal is likely to lead to significant adverse impacts in terms of the impact assessment. In this regard the applicant has provided evidence in the form of a sequential test and assessed the proposed development against the Impact assessment, under the criteria outlined in the repealed PPS6. Due to the date of submission of this application and the date of publication of PPS4, the information submitted is considered to be acceptable for the purposes of considering this application.

Policy EC18 states that local parking standards should apply to individual planning applications unless the applicant has demonstrated that a higher level of parking provision is needed and shown the measures proposed to be taken to minimise the need for parking. The applicant proposes a ration of 1:40 parking spaces which is in accordance with RSS Policy T2A which indicates that 1 space per 30 – 60sqm gross floorspace (Class B1) should be provided for Rotherham. The proposed parking ratio therefore complies with the requirements of RSS Policy T2A and subsequently Policy EC18 of PPS4.

In conclusion, whilst it is acknowledged that the PPS is now a material consideration in the determination of this planning application it does not change the recommendation for approval of the proposed development.

Planning Policy Statement 6 In terms of the assessment of the site against Planning Policy Statement 6 (PPS6), Table 2, Annex A defined Edge of Centre sites as:

188

• For retail purposes, a location that is well connected to and within easy walking distance (i.e. up to 300m) of the primary shopping area; • For all other main town centre uses, this is likely to be within 300 metres of a town centre boundary; • For office development, locations outside of the town centre but within 500 metres of a public transport interchange, including railway and bus stations, within the urban area should be considered as edge-of-centre locations for the purposes of the sequential approach.

The application site, whilst clearly not within 300 metres of a town centre boundary or currently within 500 metres of a public transport interchange has been assessed as an edge-of-centre location by the applicant for the purposes of the PPS6 assessment. This approach was taken following an agreement between the Local Planning Authority and the Applicant which, if approved, will restrict the quantum of office development to 10,000sqm, which is consistent with the extant approval, prior to the need for a public transport interchange to be operational on or directly adjacent to the site. This will be secured through the imposition of a Grampian style condition to this effect and will be consistent with the criteria in Table 2, Annex A of PPS6, in that the development will be within 500m of a public transport interchange.

The development was therefore considered to be an edge of centre location for the purposes of the sequential approach as outlined in PPS6.

Need In relation to demonstrating need, the applicant’s have assessed the office proposals drawing on the conclusions set out in the Rotherham and Doncaster Employment Land Survey (2007 & 2009) and by analysing the South Yorkshire office market.

Prior to assessing this in detail, it is important to understand the background relating to why the applicant has submitted an application for such a sizeable office development. Helical Governetz (HG) - the Applicant is a partnership of two specialists, Helical Bar PLC and Governetz Limited. It has been created to facilitate the Government’s agenda to relocate Government departments from the south east and London to the regions whilst achieving policy objectives on the sustainability and environmental agenda utilising the BREEAM methods.

This relocation agenda was borne from the Lyons Review which investigated the scope for relocating national government activities from London and the South East, in support of a renewed Government commitment to realising the efficiency and regional benefits of dispersal. The review concluded that more than 27,000 jobs could be taken out of London and the South East, including up to 20,000 jobs for dispersal as a first tranche. Plans for these dispersals should be taken forward urgently as part of the Government’s forthcoming spending review.

189 It is clear therefore that opportunities must be explored to improve the efficiency of public sector property and to create significant savings through relocating existing staff and employing new staff outside of London. Furthermore Government occupiers of new build/refurbished offices must conform to the following:

• Achieving Excellence in Construction: Sustainability; • Common Minimum Standards; • BREEAM rating of Excellent or Very Good; • Water consumption to be less that an average of 3 cubic metres per head per annum; • Government Timber Policy; • Larger than average floor plates for increased occupational efficiency.

The applicant’s have confirmed that Grade B and Grade C office space will not meet these specifications and that it is invariably financially unviable to undertake refurbishment of such space that would deliver all the specification outlined above. Grade A office space is therefore the only option available to the applicant.

Turning to the Need analysis and in particular the Rotherham Employment Land Review (2007). The applicant maintains that there is a need for high quality office development within the region. In particular they state that in terms of supply, available office space grew by 10% between 1998 and 2004, although in 2004 there was a slight reduction in available floorspace. They go on to state that based on the figures outlined in the Employment Land Review there is currently 57,505sqm of office space available either now or in the short term, of which only 32,288sqm is classified as Grade A quality. However this is predominately based within the Dearne Valley; a location which is out of centre location and contrary to the guidance contained within PPS6 relating to the sequential test.

Through analysing historic trends of office space take up, the applicant’s have quoted the Employment Land Assessment which identifies the requirement for around 40,000sqm of additional space by 2016, rising to almost 57,000 by 2021. In conclusion the applicant’s state that Waverley has the potential for a business park linked to the existing AMP which also compliments wider mixed use development at Waverley (subject to further consideration as part of the LDF process). They also state that based on enquiries to RiDO there is a demand for office floorspace in this location close to Rotherham’s Urban Area.

A similar review has been undertaken by the applicant on the Doncaster Employment Land Review (2009) which concludes that there is little apparent need to identify new office locations in the medium term beyond the known potential at Robin Hood Sheffield and in the town centre.

To supplement the assessment of the proposals against the Rotherham and Doncaster Employment Land Reviews, the applicant has undertaken a detailed analysis of the office market and the demand for new office development in Sheffield, Rotherham, Doncaster and Barnsley. In this

190 respect, their analysis highlights that in Sheffield, the greatest demand for office space is for Grade A. Rental levels have been increasing due to high demand and lack of Grade A accommodation, as required by the applicant. They acknowledge that a short term supply of office space is possible, however recognise that in order to establish itself as a mature office market, the city needs to offer occupiers a depth of choice. The applicant’s conclude that on this basis there is a need for further office accommodation in Sheffield to meet demand for accommodation.

A similar analysis was undertaken on the supply of offices in Rotherham, Doncaster and Barnsley which concluded that there is only 3,283sqm of available Grade A office space in Rotherham, 6,317sqm in Doncaster and no reported Grade A in Barnsley. The enquiries for this space have been consistent and the applicant’s claim that further office development in all Borough’s is needed to meet likely future demand.

Concerns have been raised from SCC that there has been a recent approval of planning permission at Carbrook Street / Meadowhall Way which includes up to 65,000sqm of B1(a) office space . This is acknowledged and considered in the proceeding paragraphs under the heading Sequential Test.

In summary, on the basis of the background information relating to the Government requirement to relocate Government departments to the regions, it is considered that subject to the imposition of a first user condition, restricting these to Government users for the first four years of occupation and as a result of the detailed analysis of office markets across South Yorkshire, there is a proven quantitative need to support the level of additional office floorspace proposed.

Furthermore, the proposals will meet an identified need for Grade A accommodation and will represent a major inward investment opportunity that creates a significant number of jobs for employees in the South Yorkshire region.

Qualitative Need PPS6 placed a strong emphasis on the demonstration of qualitative need. The applicant’s stated in their supporting statement that Demand for new office accommodation was therefore strong and increasing. However the majority of enquiries are focused towards new Grade A accommodation.

Demand for office space derives from the services sector and primarily the financial, business services, education and public services sectors. These sectors demand Grade A office space for their operations. Grade A space would typically have:

• A good location and design; • Good accessibility; • Good quality specification including the necessary warranties and quality assurances; • Comfort cooling;

191 • LG3 lighting suitable for computer use; • Large open plan floor plate; • Raised floor plate for ducting and cabling so that desks can be located anywhere in the office and not simply around the periphery; • DDA Compliance.

As stated above, a requirement of the relocation of Government occupiers have additional requirements and new build/refurbished offices must conform to strict sustainability criteria such as BREEAM ratings.

Grade B and Grade C space will therefore not provide these specifications and it is usually considered to be financially unviable to undertake refurbishment of older buildings that would successfully deliver all the specification.

The applicant’s also state that Rotherham does not have the same attraction as Sheffield as a location for office development as it does not have as large a population or commercial sector nor does it have the high profile tertiary education institutions that Sheffield has. It does however have a major strength in its proximity to, and links with, the M1 corridor.

Like Sheffield, Grade A office space would be attractive to occupiers in Rotherham town centre or within the M1 corridor. Unfortunately, almost all the Grade A space available in Rotherham is located in the Dearne Valley.

The Dearne Valley has provided the main location for Rotherham’s office market in recent years providing the majority of the office supply. Whereas in Sheffield, there has been a shortage of Grade A space, this has not been the case in the Dearne Valley where take up of new office space has generally been slow. As a result of this, top rents in the area for Grade A space are at £14 per sq ft and have been at this level for three to four years. There are no signs that this will change in the foreseeable future due to the existing levels of supply in the Dearne Valley.

Whilst the Dearne Valley offers a good supply of Grade A space, the main reason for the slow take up is the location, mid way between the M1 and A1 motorways and some distance from Rotherham Town Centre, which has been perceived to provide poor accessibility for staff.

Office Need Conclusion In conclusion, it is considered that the applicant has demonstrated that there is a qualitative need for the proposed development. In terms of quantitative need, the applicant’s requirement to occupy Grade A office floorspace is accepted and their analysis of available floorspace that meet this requirement is accepted as being insufficient to meet the quantum of floorspace required in one location in this instance. Given that the proposals represent a Government style campus which will see the relocation of many jobs from the south east and London and be a different offer to what is normally provided in towns and city centers, it is considered that a full demonstration quantitative and qualitative need has been demonstrated . Overall, it is considered that

192 the office element of the proposed development meets the first test as set out in PPS6.

SCC’s objections to the proposals indicate that the applicant’s Need argument is weak in that the proposals will deliver approximately 4,900 jobs. The RSS sets out the potential annual job growth for office uses in Rotherham and calculates the job generation rates to be 120 per year. SCC therefore claim that the development would account for 41 years worth of job growth on its own thereby suggesting that there is no need for such a large office scheme in PPS6 terms. However it is considered that the applicant has adequately demonstrated that there is a quantitative and qualitative need for the development, not least because there is insufficient Grade A floorspace available in any of the four towns and cities in South Yorkshire, but also because the proposals have an end user in mind which is substantiated by the imposition of a first user condition and evidenced by the publication of the Lyons Report referred to above.

Hotel With regard to the need for the hotel, this hotel is intended mainly to serve a need arising from visitors to the Government Office Campus Development as well as from visitors to the adjacent AMP development and, to a lesser extent, the Waverley New Community. Indeed the applicant’s note that the hotel is unlikely to compete for visitors to Town Centres and City Centre hotels.

The increase in the amount of B1 office accommodation proposed as part of the current application will generate an increase in the number of employees and in turn a significantly higher number of visitors and potential hotel users. The demand for the proposed hotel is therefore not considered to compete with the existing town and city centre offer in this respect.

The applicant’s also note that there is a quantitative need for an additional hotel accommodation in the local area, as well as a qualitative need for an additional hotel in the Waverley area. It is noted that additional hotels are required in Rotherham to continue the area’s economic transformation. Consequently, it is recommended that 40% of the B1(a) office space (24,200sqm) takes place before the hotel is developed. This will ensure that the critical mass of population will be developed on the application site prior to the opening of the hotel. It is important that the hotel development is phased to ensure that it is not provided prematurely. Based on the above it is therefore considered that due to the increase in employee numbers generated by the proposed office development, the additional 1,000sqm of C1 hotel floorspace can be justified as it fulfils a business need.

Scale As mentioned in the preceding section of this report, the proposed offices will be occupied by relocating Government departments from the South East and London. The scale and floorspace levels proposed (60,000sqm) have been derived from precedents set elsewhere in the UK where Helical Governetz have secured similar Government campuses. Examples of these can be found in the following locations:

193

• Keele University: 60,000sqm • Porton Down – 100,000sqm • Newport West – 60,000sqm

The applicant has stated that floorspace requirements for the model campus are based on between 4 and 10 different occupiers sharing common management, servicing and amenity facilities as far as is practically possible. The quantum of floorspace has been arrived at following in-depth and long- standing negotiations between the applicant and potential end-users and a detailed understanding of their requirements that has arisen from these ongoing discussions. From the relationship between Helical Governetz and the Office of Government Commerce (OGC), it is understood that gross floorspace requirements could be between 3,000sqm and 25,000sqm depending upon the end user.

Helical Governetz have therefore arrived at a minimum threshold of 50,000sqm in order to provide sufficient quantum of development within a campus environment to give flexibility to cover the potentially wide range of occupier floorspace requirements. In relation to these proposals, 60,000sqm has been selected by the applicant and agent as an appropriate quantum of development that is considered realistic and achievable for occupation, based on their discussions with potential Government occupiers so far. In addition to the above considerations, Helical Governetz and Harworth Estates have taken into account the scale of development which can comfortably be accommodated on this land available between the AMP and the proposed Waverley New Community.

Furthermore and given the optimum development parameters (in terms of potential government user and also urban form) of 3 and 4 storey buildings the applicant, in consultation with Officers have arrived at an acceptable layout that shows how 60,000sqm of gross office floorspace can be accommodated within a campus layout that will deliver the highest standards of urban design and an attractive landscaped setting.

Notwithstanding the above, PPS6 refers to assessing the scale of development in relation to the centre in which it is proposed, stating that:

“…..uses which attract a large number of people should be located within centres that reflect the scale and catchment of the development proposed.”

Furthermore, the factors to be considered in determining whether the scale of the proposal is appropriate are detailed in paragraphs 2.41 to 2.43 of PPS6 and include:

• “The scale of development should relate to the role and function of the centres within the wider hierarchy and the catchment served, with the aim being close 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 compliments its role and function; and

194 • For city and town centres, where a need has been identified, local planning authorities should seek to identify sites in the centre, or failing that on the edge of the centre, capable of accommodating larger format developments.”

The current application differs from the extant permission as it is now intended to develop the site as a Government office campus, therefore a greater quantum of B1(a) office space is sought in order to achieve the objectives of relocating departments from the south east and London. As a result, in terms of scale it is necessary to demonstrate that the proposed increase in both the office and hotel floorspace will be appropriate.

As set out above in the preceding paragraphs the objectives for this site is to provide a campus style development which will enable a number of Government departments to function together under one management structure. The applicant’s have demonstrated in their PPS6 Statement that there is currently a lack of very large, available, vacant office floorspace arranged in a campus style format within the four main city and town centres of South Yorkshire, whilst there is an identified need to provide additional office floorspace within the three centres (Sheffield, Rotherham and Barnsley).

It is acknowledged that the scale of development is substantial and without relevant safeguards in place could be detrimental to bringing other, more sequentially preferable sites forward in the future. Despite this, the development will be constructed and phased with an end user in mind, therefore will not be a speculative development and will be constructed over a period of approximately 10 years. It is therefore argued that whilst the provision of 60,000sqm of B1(a) office space in this location is over and beyond the quantum of floorspace identified in the Employment Land Review (2007) for the period up to 2016, the development has an identified end user and would therefore be in addition to this identified quantum.

In order to safeguard against the development becoming speculative, a first user condition is proposed restricting the occupation of the development to Government users for the first 4 years of each phase of development. This condition will ensure that the scale of development proposed would not prejudice the LDF process. It is not envisaged that pre-submission consultation on the Core Strategy will occur in the immediate future, adoption is therefore unlikely to be before 2011. The LPA must therefore determine this application on its own merits and a refusal of planning permission based on ‘prematurity’ grounds would leave the planning authority open to the claim that it was preventing, inhibiting or delaying development which could reasonably be permitted, in the light of the current development plan, so far as it is material to the application, and any other material considerations.

In terms of the proposed hotel development, the scale has been designed to operate as an ancillary element to the main campus which will generate approximately 4,900 jobs, in addition to regular visitors to the site. The additional 1,000sqm over and beyond what already has consent is therefore

195 considered to be appropriate in terms of scale as it will be ancillary to the office development, serving a business use.

Sequential Approach If approved, the development will be restricted to 10,000sqm of floorspace prior to a requirement for a public transport interchange. This will be secured by condition. As such the site will be within 500m of an interchange and for the purposes of assessing the proposals against PPS6, is categorised as an ‘edge of centre’ site.

The PPS6 Statement submitted in support of the planning application states that the search area boundary is based on the whole of the South Yorkshire region as the proposed development is seen as a development of regional importance that will operate within this market and should therefore be assessed as such.

A comprehensive list of sites has been identified within the Applicant’s supporting sequential assessment, based on information from various credible sources. The identified sites have then been assessed against the following discounting criteria:

• The site’s availability; • The site’s size and suitability to accommodate the proposed development; and • The general availability of the site.

Other points which the Applicant’s have taken into account include:

• Accessibility (in terms of linkages to major workforce for offices and general links to major road network for the hotel element); • Whether the site has planning permission for another use; • The extent of any construction on site; and • Timetable for redevelopment at the site.

In terms of sequentially preferable office sites available for development or buildings suitable for occupation in Rotherham town centre, the Applicant’s assessment has identified only the All Saints Quarter, which is currently being redeveloped and the Guest and Chrimes site, which at 5.9ha is considered to be too small to achieve and deliver the acceptable quantum of development in an office style campus as required by the applicant. Furthermore, the civic office proposals and the Listed Building on the site would further constrain the floorspace available for additional development.

Additional out of centre sites have also been identified at Manvers, Catcliffe, Bradmarsh and Dinnington Colliery, however these have been discounted on the grounds of poor accessibility and limited space available for development. Furthermore, and for the purposes of this PPS6 assessment, they are not sequentially preferable to the application site and are also discounted on that basis.

196 Potential office sites in Barnsley Town Centre have been identified as the Evolve development and the Courthouse scheme, however Evolve has only 7,432sqm of floorspace remaining and the Courthouse is an aspirational scheme which is not likely to come forward within the timescales required by the Applicant. Both of these sites have therefore been discounted.

In terms of Sheffield, the Applicant has identified the site known as the Castlemore scheme at West Bar Triangle. The site occupies a central location and planning permission for 80,000sqm of office floorspace has been granted. Despite this the site has been discounted on the grounds that due to its size and format, it would be unsuitable for a Government campus style development. Furthermore, the site has yet to be assembled and is in multiple ownership, therefore deliverability would be a significant constraint in bringing this site forward for development in the short term.

Sheffield City Council, in their consultation response have maintained that a further site, located on Carbrook Street and Meadowhall Way and referred to previously in the report, which has planning permission for 67,500sqm of office space is sequentially preferable to the application site and should therefore be included within the Applicant’s sequential assessment. The Applicant was therefore requested to undertake this further work; however they maintain that this site is not sequentially preferable to the application site and is in fact comparable on the grounds that both sites are ‘edge of centre’ for the purposes of PPS6.

Despite this, the Applicant agreed to include the site and have assessed it as follows:

• Accessibility – the proposed offices at Meadowhall are some 800m from the Meadowhall rail transport interchange. The proposed offices at Waverley will be within 500m of a public transport interchange, which will be operational prior to the occupation of 10,001sqm of office floorspace. • Regeneration Benefits for Local Communities – The application site is located in close proximity to Catcliffe, Treeton, Orgreave and Handsworth and will bring employment opportunities and benefits to the wider local economy of these settlements. The Maedowhall site is not considered to be as well located to the closest neighbouring settlements of Wincobank and Tinsley. • Vision for Waverley – The proposals for the office development and the new community should be considered in parallel, which will bring forward extensive regeneration benefits to the entire site and surrounding areas. • Control of Office Use – If planning permission is granted it will be made subject to a condition to ensure that a Government campus is delivered as opposed to a speculative development. There are no such controls on the Meadowhall permission. • Deliverability – The application site has been restored, creating development platforms which are now ready to accommodate future development. The Meadowhall site, however has not undergone

197 remediation and has existing buildings and hardstandings to the larger part of the site that will require removal.

Based on the above, RMBC are satisfied that the application site is not only comparable to the Meadowhall site, but in some instances represents a preferred location due to the wider regeneration benefits the proposals will deliver. Furthermore the restriction of users also provides comfort that the development will be provided as an office campus for use by Government departments and not as a speculative development as the Meadowhall site is considered to be, and which would be contrary to PPS6.

In conclusion, the LPA is satisfied that the Sequential Test has been applied in relation to the proposed development site and other sites within Rotherham, Sheffield, Doncaster and Barnsley and that the PPS6 Assessment demonstrates that there are no sites available, within the towns and city centres which are suitable for the proposed development.

Impact The PPS6 Assessment submitted in support of the application considered the potential impact of the proposal on the role and function of Rotherham, Doncaster, Sheffield and Barnsley town and city centres. Whilst also assessing the effect it may have on public and private sector investment and the number of vacant units within the primary shopping area.

A key element that differentiates this development from other speculative office developments will be that this proposal will be constructed with an end user in mind and their requirements are such that a lower density development, with a strong landscaped boundary is required, which as demonstrated in the Sequential Test cannot be provided in any of the town or city centres. For this reason it is considered that the proposed campus style development will be complimentary to the role and function of South Yorkshire’s towns and city centres.

In terms of assessing the impact of the development on public and private sector investment, the applicant argues that whilst the Sequential Test identifies a number of sites that could be reoccupied or redeveloped for office use, these are not suitable for this particular development for reasons outlined in the preceding paragraphs, however the applicant considers there to be sufficient capacity to support the reoccupation/redevelopment of these sites as well. When determining if this is an accurate assessment, it is important to note that these proposals have an end user and will be an addition to the floorspace identified in the Employment Land Review. Following consideration therefore, it is not considered that the application proposals will negatively impact on the investment within the surrounding centres. Indeed the potential increase in convenience/comparison goods, as well as leisure expenditure within the local catchment brought about by future employees and visitors generated by the new office floorspace may assist in positively impacting on investment within this area.

198 Turning to the effect of the proposals on the number of vacant units within the borough’s Primary Shopping Area, the applicant’s assessment states that there currently exists an ongoing demand for B1 office, hotel accommodation and retail units within the surrounding centres, and there are regeneration projects planned or in progress in several of the centres which will continue to be implemented to meet this demand. For this reason it is therefore not considered that there will be any increase in vacancies as a result of the proposed development. Similarly, the proposed hotel would serve a different market to any hotel located within Rotherham town centre and is unlikely to be detrimental to the town centre. Therefore, this is considered to demonstrate that the proposed offices and hotel will not have an unacceptable impact upon the town centre and meets the criteria set out in PPS6.

Accessibility The site’s accessibility is considered in more detail in the ‘Highways’ section of the report below. It is concluded that the site will be well served by a choice of means of transport through the delivery of the Travel Plan measures and public transport improvements, including the delivery of a new public transport interchange.

Other Planning Policy Statement 6 Considerations Following consideration of the above criteria, PPS6 advises that other considerations including local issues may be material to the choice of locations. These include:

• Physical Regeneration • Employment • Economic Growth • Social Inclusion

In terms of physical regeneration, the site has been restored to development platforms through a permitted restoration scheme. The platforms are now complete and ready to accommodate development, therefore the proposed development will take place on brownfield land that has been previously prepared for physical regeneration to take place, which carries significant weight when considering whether the development is acceptable in this location. Furthermore and notwithstanding the PPS6 Assessment above, the site is allocated for Industry and Business in the adopted UDP, which does not preclude or restrict the quantum of B1(a) office floorspace in this location.

Turning to potential employment opportunities created by the proposals, the Applicant’s state that the development will provide approximately 2,000 new employment opportunities to support the economic regeneration of the area. This is 2,900 (4,900 in total) short of what the proposed development is expected to create as a whole, however it is recognised that these jobs are likely to be relocated from London and the South East. Despite this, an additional 2,000 new employment opportunities represents a significant, welcome boost to the South Yorkshire economy.

199 Directly linked to employment opportunities is economic growth, it is acknowledged that the proposed development will capture inward investment by the Government in the South Yorkshire region and added to the existing AMP development, the proposals will create a regionally and nationally recognised commercial hub in South Yorkshire.

Conclusion The site is allocated for Industry and Business in the adopted UDP, which does not preclude nor restrict the quantum of B1(a) office floorspace. Despite this, due to the scale and location of the site, it is necessary to assess the proposals against criteria outlined in PPS6.

The applicant has demonstrated in the supporting assessment that the proposals will meet an identified need for Grade A campus style office accommodation and will represent a major inward investment opportunity that will create a number of jobs for employees in the South Yorkshire region.

The site has been assessed as an edge of centre site for the purposes of the Sequential Teat, however a ‘Grampian’ style condition is necessary to support this, ensuring that a public transport interchange is operation prior to the occupation of any more than 10,000sqm of B1(a) floorspace. The Sequential Test identified a number of sites in sequentially preferable locations in Rotherham, Sheffield, Doncaster and Rotherham, however these have been discounted predominately due to scale.

SCC’s concerns regarding the proposal have been noted and taken into consideration, however the proposals have been assessed carefully against relevant local, regional and national policy and it is considered that the application proposals will not have a detrimental impact on Sheffield City Centre. The applicant has also compared the application site against the site close to Meadowhall which has an extant permission for 67,500sqm of B1(a) office space for the purposes of the Sequential Test and the LPA is satisfied that the Meadowhall site is not sequentially preferable and should not be considered favourably to the application site.

Planning policy is therefore considered to be supportive of the office development provided that it does not compromise the objectives for the town and city centres, in line with the Regional Spatial Strategy. It has been demonstrated that providing relevant safeguards are put in place, which include conditions relating to the restriction of the first user, restricting the floorspace prior to the operation of a public transport interchange and the delivery of the hotel, the development will compliment the town and city centre offers and will not conflict with the objectives of those centres, in line with PPS6 and the RSS.

Transportation Issues The applicant has submitted a Transport Assessment and a Framework Travel Plan in support of the application. When assessing the impact of the proposed office development consideration was given to the additional vehicular trip rate generated over and above the extant B1, B2 and B8

200 development. These trip generation rates have been agreed with the local highway authorities (RMBC and SCC) and the Highways Agency and differences between the two applications are shown in the following table, which has been reproduced from the applicant’s Transport Assessment (TA).

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arrivals Departures Arrivals Departures Consented trips to 581 101 106 471 site Current Application 884 120 122 705 trips Change +303 +19 +16 +234

The distribution of these trips is in accordance with that previously agreed for this site and confirmed by using a gravity model. The assignment of these trips to the road network has been undertaken by using the SATURN model.

The overall additional 250 trips, in the afternoon peak hour, represent a 43% increase in trip generation over and above the extant development. In order to ensure that the local highway network can accommodate these additional trips the applicant has identified improvements to local junctions within the immediate vicinity of the site.

This mitigation has been assessed and is considered to be acceptable. It includes the following which will be delivered through a series of Section 278 Agreements:

B6066 Highfield Spring / Brunel Way (AMP North) The improvement scheme proposed as part of the extant permission and has been shown by the applicant to work satisfactorily with the quantum of trip generation proposed as part of this application. This scheme involves the removal of the roundabout and its replacement with a signalised cross-roads incorporating the facility for a bus priority lane to assist buses leaving the proposed interchange / park and ride scheme.

B6066 Highfield Spring / Spine Road A third access point to Highfield Spring is proposed.

A630 Parkway / B6533 Poplar Way / Europa Way The TA has been based on the assumption that the following improvements to the junction are committed:

• Two lanes in each direction under the Parkway • The signalisation of the two roundabouts • A dedicated left turn slip between Poplar Way and the Sheffield bound carriageway of the Parkway.

The first of these has been delivered by RMBC, however the remainder are not in any programme of works and have no committed funding. As such it is necessary for the applicant to provide these.

201

B6533 Poplar Way / B6066 Highfield Spring / B6066 Poplar Way The TA has been based on improvements at this junction, which are a condition on the continued build-out of the AMP development. As such it is necessary for the applicant to provide these works at a point in the development acceptable to the LPA.

B6533 Poplar Way between Parkway and Highfield Spring The TA has been based on dualling this section of highway, which are again a condition on the continued build-out of the AMP development. It is again necessary for the applicant to provide these works at a point in the development acceptable to the LPA.

B6533 Poplar Way / B6066 Orgreave Road An improvement scheme is proposed for this location that includes: • Converting to signal control • Widening to two lanes on the Poplar Way approach

These works will be also be carried out by the applicant.

In summary, the analysis of the TA shows that the development will increase traffic on the local highway network, however the mitigation proposed will ensure that the network will still work within normal operating conditions. The proposed improvements to the above junctions will be carried out at various phases of development which will be agreed with the LPA. Officers from Sheffield City Council agree that the mitigation proposed will negate the impact of the development, however have raised concerns that the site is located in an unsustainable location and therefore contrary to PPG13. This has been considered earlier in this report under the principle of development and is concluded that the site will be readily accessible once improvements to public transport are implemented. This is considered below.

Accessibility Pedestrians Accessibility There are very few houses within the suggested acceptable walking distance for commuting (1,000m). Most of Catcliffe and a portion of Handsworth are within the preferred maximum commuting distance (2,000m). If the related application for residential housing is approved this will eventually place an additional 4,000 houses within acceptable commuting distances.

In these circumstances the site is unlikely to promote walking as a prime means of access although the proposal to develop a residential area nearby will improve the situation.

Cycling Rotherham cycle map (2006) shows traffic-free paths connecting the site with Catcliffe, the Trans-Pennine Trail and Brinsworth. Bridleways are proposed to link the site to the Woodhouse Mill and Orgreave area. As part of the planning application it is proposed to provide a section of bridleway together

202 with a light controlled crossing point across Highfield Spring. This bridleway will link the site to the proposed bridge across the Parkway.

The site is therefore considered to be reasonably accessible for cyclists.

Public Transport Provision The site meets the criteria outlined in RSS Policy T3 which states that new employment provision should be within a 5 minute walk to a bus stop and SYPTE’s minimum criteria of a two per hour bus service within a 400m walking distance.

The existing 32 service between Sheffield and Rotherham currently runs along Highfield Spring every 30 minutes and other services in the area include the A1 and X14/X15. The A1 provides a two per hour link to Meadowhall Interchange and the X15 provides an hourly service to Sheffield Interchange via Poplar Way and the Parkway. Bus services in the area therefore provide a minimum level of service of four buses per hour to a major public transport interchange, which is consistent with the criterion in the RSS.

Despite this and in order to encourage the use of public transport in the area, SYPTE are promoting a scheme to construct a 1,000 space Park and Ride facility within the wider Waverley site which will provide a car competitive bus link into Sheffield and Rotherham, however this is not currently committed. The extant permission includes for providing the land for this proposal and for providing an interchange building. This requirement will also be included in this S106 legal agreement should permission be granted.

If the proposed Park and Ride facility is unsuccessful, the applicant will be required to improve the existing public transport provision which will consist of a financial contribution of £1,500,000. This will ensure that an over reliance on the single car use is not encouraged and public transport will be an attractive alternative in line with UDP Policy T6, RSS Policy T3 and PPG13.

Travel Plan The Applicant has submitted a Framework Travel Plan as part of the Transport Assessment to support the planning application. This document is aimed at reducing the reliance on single person occupancy car use by promoting realistic alternatives, particularly through public transport provision. It will also provide an over-arching strategy for the site and will be updated as individual phased developments are progressed.

The following items will be included:

Public Transport • Park & Ride with BRT • Real time information

Information • Travel packs • Route maps

203 • Campus website

Parking Provision • Parking standards • Priority parking for car sharers • Pedal cycle and motorcycle facilities

Car Share • Car share schemes • Car clubs (i.e. City Car Club)

Walking and cycling • Good, safe connections to adjacent communities and facilities • Signed routes • Pool bicycle scheme • Permeability

In addition, the Travel Plan will include a Delivery Plan and an agreed methodology for reviewing the success of the Plan. The main responsibility for delivery of the Plan will lie with a Sustainable Travel Manager, who will be employed by the applicant or developer.

The success of the Plan will be measured against pre-agreed indicators, such as car club participation, bus passenger numbers or simple traffic counts. Targets for each indicator will be set prior to occupation and achievement of those targets will be monitored through a programme of ongoing surveys. The results of the monitoring programme will be presented by the Sustainable Travel Manager to regular meetings of the Travel Plan Steering Group, made up of the developer, RMBC and the Highways Agency. The Steering Group will review progress of the Plan against targets and, where necessary, identify appropriate additional measures to ensure targets for non-car modes are achieved.

Car Parking Ratios The application, when originally submitted in October 2008, proposed 1,714 car parking spaces to serve the proposed office development, in addition to a further 120 to serve the proposed hotel. This equated to a ratio of 1:35sqm.

RSS Policy T2A confirms the need to use maximum parking standards, cross referenced to table 13.5 which indicates that 1 space per 30 – 60sqm gross floorspace (Class B1) should be provided for Rotherham. This range therefore provides flexibility for the LPA to determine maximum levels.

In this instance and given the site’s close proximity to the proposed park and ride site it was considered that a higher ratio could be justified to encourage increased patronage of public transport. In this respect a ratio of 1:40 has been agreed which reduces the quantum of parking provision from 1,714 to

204 1,500 and will accommodate trips to the site that would arise from a typical office development in the TRICS B1(a) database.

Based on this information, it is considered that the proposed car parking provision is in accordance with RSS Policy T2A and PPG13.

Conclusion Overall it is considered that the site will be accessible by public transport and cyclists and whilst it is acknowledged that it is not readily accessibly by pedestrians in its current form, the proposed new community will include dedicated pedestrian routes to the site which will improve this situation. Furthermore the improvements to the aforementioned junctions will ensure that the additional traffic on the highway network will not be detrimental by virtue of increased delay times. Improvements to public transport, which may include the bus rapid transit, will also assist in reducing the number of trips by car users and the implementation of the Travel Plan will promote travel by alternative methods of travel. The proposed development is therefore considered to be acceptable from a highway safety and transportation point of view in that it complies with Local, Regional and National planning guidance in this respect.

Drainage The drainage of this site cannot be taken in isolation as it is intrinsically linked to the wider Waverley site. When considering this element of the proposals, it is therefore imperative that the wider proposals are taken into account which is why the surface water drainage strategy, submitted by the applicant in support of this application, contains the same detail as the new community apart from the assessment which relates to the small areas categorised as Flood Zones 2 and 3 within the wider new community site.

In this respect the following assessment is practically the same as the one in the application for the new community which is set out below:

Impact of Flooding and Mitigation The application site lies entirely within Flood Zone 1. An Outline Surface Water Strategy Report was submitted as part of the application. To demonstrate that the proposed development is in compliance with the requirements of PPS25, it was checked against criteria set out within this guidance note.

The reports assess the surface water flows and discharges within the entire Waverley site. They also detail surface water proposals for the restoration scheme and include measures to protect the site and surrounding areas and the River Rother from excessive surface water run off from the site. The key aspects of the assessments are considered to be as follows:

• The construction of three reservoirs designed to attenuate and assist in the control of surface water run off for the proposed future development. The design of the reservoirs have been carried out and approved by the Panel Reservoir Engineer.

205 • The construction of drainage channels to transfer water from the site and discharge at low velocities, into the reservoirs, for the proposed future development. • The diversion of Handsworth Beck and its discharge to the reservoirs minimising the risk of flooding to adjacent land. • The restricted discharge of 5 litres/second/hectare from the reservoirs into the River Rother, maximising full storage capacity within the reservoir and only allowing a minimal and controlled discharge into the river. • The surface water drainage systems are designed on the present recommendation of 1 in 100 year with an allowance of 30% for climate change. • Incorporation of Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SUDs) will assist in reducing the impact of flooding on existing drainage systems. • Proposed diversion of the surface water drainage from the Advance Manufacturing Park (AMP) site from the existing Sheffield Airport sewer in Polar Way, Catcliffe and into the surface water drainage system before discharging into the reservoirs within the Waverley site. • Flood routine for all surface water run off from the restoration site is considered essential in the management of surface water flows. This also applies to the phasing of the development and the need to minimise the risk of overland flooding to the development and surrounding areas.

The details outlined above show how some of the mitigation measures have been proposed to minimise any possible impact of flooding. However, these mitigation measures are not fully exhaustive given that this is a significant development, which is likely to take 20 to 25 years to complete. Therefore further assessments regarding the impact of flooding and additional mitigation measures may be required throughout the duration of the development.

PPS25 requires that development does not worsen the flood risk to other properties. As previously stated, the development site falls entirely within Flood Zone 1, and therefore the proposed development is considered to be suitable for the site.

Impact on Flooding of adjacent Areas Within the Outline Surface Water Strategy Report details of the surface water drainage modelling and proposed indicative network have been submitted. The key aspects in assessing the impact of flooding of adjacent areas are considered to be:

• The reservoirs are designed based on a 1 in 100 year rainfall return period over a 72 hour duration with a 30% allowance for climate change. The reservoirs are designed to discharge into the River Rother at a restricted rate.

206 • Flow velocities within open channels and the reservoir inflow structures will in general be limited 3 m/sec, minimising the risk of scouring and flooding to surrounding areas. • In general the contours of the restoration site are designed to fall towards the reservoirs within the Waverley site. • Proposed diversion of the surface water drainage from the Advance Manufacturing Park (AMP) site from the existing Sheffield Airport sewer in Polar Way, Catcliffe and into the surface water drainage system before discharging into the reservoirs within the Waverley site. This will reduce the amount of surface water flows and provide more capacity within the existing drainage system.

Once the site is developed, the development drainage systems should drain directly to the reservoirs and then discharge into the River Rother at a controlled rate. This will have the effect of regulating flows within the river. The village of Catcliffe suffered from the June 2007 floods, the design of the surface water drainage system and attenuation of flows within the Waverley site should therefore minimise the risk of flooding to Catcliffe from surface water run off from the Waverley site, thereby improving the current situation in this area.

Surface Water Drainage The Outline Surface Water Strategy Report provides details of the surface water drainage modelling and proposed indicative network. The key aspects in assessing the surface water drainage are considered to be as follows:

• Volume of the reservoirs are designed based on a 1 in 100 year rainfall return period over a 72 hour duration with a 20% allowance for climate change. The reservoirs are designed to discharge into the River Rother at a restricted rate. • All sewers will be designed to the latest version of Sewers for Adoption, presently designed to a 1 in 30 year event. Sewers to discharge to drainage channels before discharging to the reservoirs. • Velocities in open channels and at the reservoir inflow structures will in general be limited to maximum 3m/second. This will be achieved by the introduction of the following: - • Changes in direction of flows or the introduction of meanders. • Cascades of varying forms, particularly at road crossings and sewer discharge points. • Rock rakes. • Rough bed channels and rip rap. • Development surface water drainage systems should be offered to the Water Company for adoption. • Restoration drainage should drain to existing surface water drainage systems situated within the site and discharge to the reservoirs.

207 • Further details showing the catchment areas for surface water runoff within the site and surrounding areas, for each phase of the development are required. This will ensure that there is adequate capacity for discharge of surface water runoff within each section of the drainage system, during and after completion of the development. • Further details of upstream section of Handsworth Beck are required to ensure that the position of the Beck does not compromise the development layout. • Flood routing for all surface water drainage system must be carried out to ensure that there is minimal risk to properties and surrounding land.

In order to ensure the delivery of the key aspects above, details of surface water drainage should be designed and approved during the duration of the development. Plans and details of the drainage channel capacities will therefore be provided so that all discharges from the development can be carefully monitored and approved as the site is developed which is likely to take 20 to 25 years to complete. A condition to this effect will be placed on any approval of planning consent.

Foul Water Very little details of the foul water drainage have been provided for the development and the restoration site does not require any provision for foul drainage.

The foul drainage serving the existing development within the Waverley site (AMP) is pumped and discharges to Yorkshire Water Sewage Treatment Works at Blackburn Meadows, Sheffield. The applicant is presently in discussion with Yorkshire Water to discharge all foul water drainage from the development by gravity via a transfer sewer to Woodhouse Mill Sewage Treatment Works, however this plant is currently full to capacity. In order to address this existing problem, it is likely that refurbishment works will be required at Woodhouse Mill Sewage Treatment Works, therefore before the works can receive foul drainage from the Waverley development, improvement works need to be carried out. Until this time foul drainage will be pumped and discharged to Blackburn Meadows.

Further details are required from the developer at detailed design stage to determine and approve all proposed foul drainage serving the Waverley development prior to the commencement of any development on site and a condition to this effect will be placed on any approval of planning consent.

Environment Agency Response Based on the information contained in Outline Surface Water Strategy Report and the Flood Risk Assessment dated 06/10/09, the Environment Agency's response is as follows:

208 • A full site drainage scheme is required prior to any development on site and should be designed in conjunction with the Outline Surface Water Strategy: Project Waverley: New Community, dated 17 th September 2009; • Finished floor levels should be set to a minimum of 150mm above finished ground levels; • Prior to commencement of development a verification report demonstrating works set out in the approved remediation strategy shall be approved by the LPA; • Long term management, monitoring and contingency action shall be approved by the LPA; • Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the consent of the LPA; • A foul drainage scheme is required prior to any development

The above measures and information should reduce the impact of flooding and potential for contamination on the proposed development and future occupants, and ensure safe access and egress from the site. Although the Environment Agency are satisfied at this stage that the proposed development could be allowed in principle, the applicant will need to provide further information relating to the proposals to an acceptable standard to ensure that the proposed development can go ahead without posing an unacceptable flood risk.

Conclusion The drainage assessment considers the suitability of the site for restoration and residential use associated with the development of the Waverley site. The foul, surface water drainage and land drainage serving the Waverley site has been approved in principle, but there are issues which must be addressed by Harworth Estates and any future developer before and during the development of the site, especially when it is likely that the site will take 20 to 25 years to complete.

The main issues that require further details and confirmation at detailed design stage include the following:

• Details showing the catchment areas for surface water runoff within the site and surrounding areas, for each phase of the development are required. • Details of upstream section of Handsworth Beck are required to ensure that the position of the Beck does not compromise the development layout. • Flood routing for all surface water drainage system must be carried out to ensure that there is minimal risk to properties and surrounding land. • Details of how the current restoration drainage will fit within the proposed development drainage plans and the Masterplan, in particular Handsworth Beck and drainage channels C and C2.

209 • Details of how the drainage systems shall be maintained and managed during and after completion of the development such that regular monitoring and maintenance of the watercourses and reservoirs will be required to ensure adequate capacity is provided within the site’s drainage system. This should also include details of satisfactory maintenance strips along the piped network and open watercourses, to allow access for maintenance and in emergencies. • Drainage channel capacities must not be exceeded and velocities in general must not exceed 3 m/second.

It is considered that the above can be guaranteed through the imposition of conditions should planning permission be granted at this outline stage.

Urban Design In support of the application an indicative masterplan has been submitted for consideration. The aim of the masterplan is to create a high quality commercial development which will fully integrate with the new community. In this respect a significant number of discussions between RMBC Officers and the applicant have taken place since the submission of the application in October 2008 to ensure that the two proposals are integrated as far as is practicably possible.

In the first instance the original masterplan proposed a linear form of development with the hotel shown in the north eastern corner of the development and 975sqm of ancillary retail. Concerns were raised by Officers and CABE that the two developments did not integrate to any degree. As a result, the proposed hotel has been relocated and is now shown on the revised masterplan within the heart of the office development, at the head of the new community water street. Furthermore 475sqm of ancillary retail and leisure has been relocated into that water street to encourage pedestrian transition between the two which will increase the vibrancy of this area. The linear form of development has also been amended to provide a perimeter block approach with iconic buildings located on the prominent corners of the site.

It is acknowledged that the masterplan is for illustrative purposes only and demonstrates that the quantum of development can be satisfactorily accommodated on site, whilst protecting the important design principles. The use of a Design Code will ensure that a high quality development will be created whilst at the same time ensuring that the development is integrated with the new community as far as is practicably possible. Overall, it is considered that the proposed development has been well thought out and will significantly improve the appearance of this area in accordance with UDP Policies ENV3.1 and T6 and National Policy PPS1.

Public Rights of Way There are public rights of way that cross through the application site which are currently being diverted or re-instated as part of the Rights of Way Public Access Action Plan. This document is a requirement of the restoration

210 proposals and regard has been given to this in the design of the illustrative masterplan. At detailed design stage further consideration needs to be given to these to ensure that they function in an acceptable and agreed manner.

Landscaping and Public Realm The creation of a high quality environment for the site is an essential component of the entire Waverley development. Very little vegetation currently exists on the site due to the nature of the historic coal mining operations.

The revised masterplan illustrates an enhanced setting for the development from the original masterplan for the site. Improvements have been made to the parkland setting, located either side of the access road. Proposals for Highfield Lane Boundary planting are also welcomed. It is acknowledged that the application is in outline, however it is important to ensure thst the design for landscaping and the public realm is developed as a key component of the overall masterplan.

The applicant’s have set out in their Design and Access Statement a landscape strategy which consists of the following;

• Supporting the design of the different office buildings; • Providing buffer zones between the development and Highfield Spring; • Providing recreation areas for office workers; patios and gardens; • Supporting and enhancing the local ecosystem; • Providing a strong link/integration with Waverley AMP and Waverley New Community through the continuation of a spatial hierarchy which includes the water street, Highfield Square and Highfield Road.

The strategy for the overall Waverley development site proposes to link green spaces with safe pedestrian routes, preferably along green corridors. This makes the site more accessible by encouraging recreational walking, enhancing the landscape and providing routes for the movement of wildlife.

Furthermore, in order to break down the visual scale of the proposed buildings and car parks, significant planting areas are shown on the indicative masterplan. The eastern boundary will be planted with semi mature and heavy standard trees to soften the edge with the new community. The entrance area to the development, to the north, is also shown as being planted to achieve both an attractive entrance and act as screening.

In assessing whether the proposals are acceptable it is disappointing that the current proposals do not make any reference to the Landscape Design Code provided as part of the extant planning permission, although this was noted to require further development post decision. It is therefore considered that to ensure the design of the landscaping and public realm is delivered to an acceptable standard the details should be included within the Design Code for the wider application site.

Air Quality

211 RMBC has declared several Air Quality Management Areas for annual mean nitrogen dioxide (one of the National Air Quality Strategy pollutants). An Air Quality Management Area is a statutory designation of a defined area and is declared because pollutant levels were predicted to exceed the National Air Quality Strategy Standards by the target year. The Air Quality Management Area in Rotherham which is predicted to be impacted upon by the Waverley Community is the Rotherham MBC M1 Air Quality Management Area.

The M1 Air Quality Management Area was declared in Rotherham against the target for annual average Nitrogen Dioxide (NO 2) on 1st January 2002. The single biggest source within a distance of 100 metres of the M1 is motorway traffic itself.

The location of the M1 Air Quality Management Area lies adjacent to the M1 but currently excludes the application site. Despite this, the whole of Sheffield City Council’s urban area has been designated as an Air Quality Management Area. The site is therefore bordered to the north and south by an Air Quality Management Area. Due to the proximity of the site to the Air Quality Management Area (1km) a detailed air quality assessment has been carried out on behalf of the applicant and submitted in support of this application.

The assessment predicted that during the construction phase of the proposed development, dust generation is likely. This may result in significant effects, with the overlapping construction phases of the AMP and the new community. However it is proposed to condition a number of mitigation measures to prevent any adverse impact on existing residents of the outlying villages of Catcliffe, Treeton and Orgreave as well as future residents of Waverley. These will include activities to minimise dust generating activities, use of a water bowser, vehicles switching off their engines when stationary, wheel cleaning and minimising vehicular movements around the site.

When the development is complete, the main effect on air quality will be emissions from traffic generated by the proposed development, however the current proposals do not increase the level of traffic generation from that of the extant permission, therefore it is considered that the office development will have a negligible adverse impact on air quality and consequently, the impact on air quality is considered to be acceptable.

Sustainability and Renewable technology As set out above, the proposals are borne from the fact that there is a drive from central Government to relocate Government departments from the south east and London into the regions. The transformation of the Government’s estate is also being driven by making improvements to the working environment by:

• Reducing the size of the estate to 10 million square metres by 2013; • Reducing workspace usage from an average of 16 square metres per person to 10-12; • Square metres per person by 2013;

212 • Reducing CO2 emissions by 25% by 2013; • Support for flexible working patterns, including working from home and hot-desking; • Ensuring quality in design and procurement, including sustainability; • Regional portfolio planning and delivery (for example Civil Service West Midlands); • Co-location and clustering; and • Engaging with the wider public sector.

In this respect it is crucial that the proposed development meet the highest standards in building function and environmental performance. The proposed development will therefore be built to BREEAM ‘Excellent’ standards in line with Government requirements. The Design and Access Statement outlines a number of Low and Zero Carbon Renewable Energy Options including Ground Source heat pumps, micro wind, building management systems and heat recovery methods.

Furthermore, there are a number of broad aspects of the development that with early design consideration at this current masterplanning stage has assisted with achieving the BREEAM Excellent aspiration. These include provision for separate waste sources, a strong public transport network and appropriate materials for civil engineering aspects and materials such as recycled aggregate.

The proposals to reduce carbon emissions and meet the Government’s criteria to improve environmental quality is welcomed and in order to ensure the delivery of these objectives, a condition will be placed on any planning approval requiring that all buildings proposed will meet BREEAM Excellent.

Conclusion It is considered that the proposed development accords with RSS Policies SY1 ‘South Yorkshire Sub Policy Area’ and E3 ‘Land and Premises for Economic Development in that that it provides a new office campus for Government office workers in Rotherham and supports the development of public services. In addition, the proposal is considered to comply with UDP Policies EC3.1 ‘Land identified for Industrial and Business Use’ which supports a B1 Use as proposed.

In terms of National Policy PPS4, it is considered that the proposal accords with the key aim of this national policy document in that it pursues economic development together with providing environmental improvements by developing a currently vacant site with a high quality purpose built office development.

The applicant has demonstrated through a PPS6 Assessment that the proposed development accords with the 5 key tests set out at Paragraph 3.3 of Planning Policy Statement 6. The applicant has demonstrated a need (which goes beyond PPS4 requirements) for the proposed development; that it is of an appropriate scale; that there are no sites available within Rotherham, Sheffield, Doncaster or Barnsley Town Centres which are

213 suitable for the proposed development; that there will be no unacceptable impacts on these Town Centres and that the proposed development site is accessible by public transport. Improvements to public transport which may include improving the existing services or by contributing towards the provision of a park and ride facility to deliver bus rapid transit will ensure that the use of single car use will be reduced in accordance with PPG13 and the provision of pedestrian links to and from this facility will ensure attractive pedestrian accessibility for all.

Taking account of the above, it is considered that the proposals accord with the Development Plan and there are no other material considerations which indicate otherwise.

214