|
Greenstructure and
Urban Planning - Case Study - Sheffield, UK - Greenspace
planning |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sheffield - the planning process and greenspace - an examination of the content of the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) as it relates to greenspace The following notes summarise Sheffield City Discussion documents relating to the need to revise the UDP as it relates to greenspace. These documents are available in full on internet for public use. This summary is only intended as an overview for those interested in Sheffield City's approach to planning greenspace. It shows the concerns at the discussion stage of the UDP process; nothing is yet finalised. For full information visit: http://www.sheffield.gov.uk then type UDP into the search box Every major city in Britain is required to have a Unitary Development Plan (UDP) . The statements produced govern the planning of the urban area and are drawn up and regularly reviewed under strict Government guidelines. The following summarises the content of Sheffield's current UDP as it relates to greenspaces - this plan is being reviewed and going through public consultation at present (2003). Major Issues Introduction The most important issues for the Green Environment section of the UDP concern policies relating to the Green Belt, biodiversity and the Air Quality Management Areas. Green Belt By law Green Belts can only be altered in exceptional circumstances. Identification of any exceptional circumstances is underway. This takes account of the strategic issue for the city which relates to the form of settlements. Due to lack of development, land over 20 schools were built in the Green Belt adjoining the urban area over the last two decades. This is now against Government policy and there is a need to remove the school buildings from the Green Belt, or to remove the whole site and protect the playing fields through Open Space policies. There are issues relating to the reclamation of derelict land in the Green Belt which need resolution. In the past the City Council chose not to include a policy on major developed sites within the Green Belt in the adopted Plan. However, this is now being considered to meet the national Planning Policy Guidance 2 (PPG2). Definition of the major developed sites in the Green Belt could give owners an incentive to make environmental improvements, thus helping secure jobs and prosperity without further harming the open character of the Green Belt. PPG2 is, however, rather vague and does not give precise guidance on the appropriate size threshold for identifying sites in Sheffield. It is likely that only a small number of sites will fall within the Government description of a 'major' site. There is a need to develop an approach to dealing with garden extensions or extensions to existing non-residential buildings in the Green Belt. Discussions are underway on the need to strengthen the city's landscape protection capabilities through the UDP. The Countryside Commission has divided England into unique 'Character Areas', of which two cover Sheffield. Each one has a description that seeks to evoke what sets it apart from any other in Britain, and gives some pointers to land and landscape management issues for the city. Sheffield's surface is covered by the 'Nottinghamshire/ Derbyshire/ Yorkshire Coalfield' and 'Yorkshire Southern Pennine Fringe' Countryside Character Areas. PPG7 advises that this approach is descriptive and not an additional layer of protection. The descriptions of these character areas can be used to identify Areas of High Landscape Value within the city.
Sheffield's argicultural fringe is held to be of great value by its inhabitants. Most of it was bought by the city in the 1930s to hold for the benefit of the local people. Farms are leased to the farmers. Some amalgamation of working units has taken place as farming has changed and many outlying farm buildings now have a solely residential use - they are much sought after. Development in the Green Belt is highly controlled. The landscape is managed by the farmers. Much of Sheffield's Green Belt as well as the land within the Peak District National Park boundary are in agricultural use. Government policy is now to strongly encourage well-conceived farm diversification schemes - what this means for Sheffield's agricultural land is being discussed. It is already encouraged by the present UDP but, given the recent difficulties experienced by farmers, it is considered that further assistance to them may be necessary. Biodiversity and Nature Conservation The variety of nature conservation site designations has sometimes caused confusion and consideration is being given to simplification to bring it into line with recent Government guidance (PPG9). The need for additional areas for nature conservation and some small-scale redrawing of the boundaries is being considered (see section in this report on Nature Conservation). The adopted UDP already includes policies to protect important nature conservation sites, but there is now increasing awareness of the need to consider wildlife outside designated areas (i.e. address biodiversity issues more widely). Discussions are taking place to identify changes which should be made to the UDP plan to promote biodiversity in the areas of the city not covered by conservation legislation. English Nature, the government agency responsible for the care of nature, has divided England into 'Natural Areas'. These are based on the distribution of wildlife and natural features (note: they pre-date the landscape Character Zones identified by the Countryside Agency, but still have to be allowed for in the city planning process). Sheffield lies primarily within the 'Coal Measures' Natural Area - each Natural Area has key issues and objectives that need to be incorporated into UDP policies and management plans. A further aspect of English Nature's remit for which provision also needs to be made in the UDP is their recommendation that people should have an accessible "natural" green space within 300 metres of their homes. English Nature also recommends that Local Nature Reserves should be provided at the level of 1 hectare for every 1,000 people. It is likely that these standards will be incorporated into the draft UDP Review.
Air Pollution Recently the city has declared two Air Action Zones (also known as Air Quality Management Areas). They cover the City Centre and the M1 Corridor (motorway) and are areas where levels of nitrogen dioxide are expected to exceed Government health-based guidelines. A significant proportion of this nitrogen dioxide is generated by vehicular traffic, so land-use and traffic planning will be important elements of the management plan. The UDP will be only one contributor to the action plans for these areas, but it has an important role to ensure that any development is appropriate. No consideration appears to be being given to the layout of greenspaces along the valleys, to allow free flow of air and so lessening the pockets of air pollution.
Sheffield's Green Network in the planning process The current UDP includes a map which identifies a network of open spaces, water areas and countryside that are linked together. The Review is taking account of recent developments that may have affected this and examining how the various issues related to the green environment listed above might impact on the network and result in a need to change parts of it ( see section on parks).
Trees and Woodland The revised South
Yorkshire Forest Plan 2000 includes boundary changes which influence the UDP for Sheffield and there is a need for a change in emphasis to reflect woodland in its new wider context. Community involvement and the regeneration of woodlands have become important. What the UDP says will influence the SYF's success in attracting grants for woodland enhancement. As part of the discussions necessary around this issue, a draft Trees and Woodlands Strategy was produced by the Parks, Woodlands and Countryside Service in 2002. This outlines the Council's proposals for managing and developing all the City's trees and woodlands in a comprehensive and sustainable way. One area of concern is the impact that housing developments can have on the wildlife value of adjoining ancient woodland (as a result of increased disturbance from occupiers of the housing).
Rivers and Streams The current UDP does not specifically refer to sustainable urban drainage. There is now discussion as to whether the City can aim to retain surface water run-off as far up-stream as possible, in order to prevent flooding downstream and also to encourage the development of a more natural environment. In recent years many new public footpaths have been opened up along riverbanks. These linear recreation routes are seen as important and the links are improved or opened up whenever major redevelopment schemes are located on riverside sites. However, where the scale of new development has been modest, it has proved difficult to identify sufficient funds for this purpose. Discussions are taking place on whether one way of making progress in improving linear open spaces along rivers might be to impose financial contributions on housing developers as part of the planning permission process. This would just extend the present contributions which in many cases have to be made towards informal open space provision within a new housing area to nearby riverside space. This is a possible and multi-functional solution to opening up the potential of rivers and streams as green corridors - they could be used for wildlife recreation and of course as a means of promoting sustainable urban drainage. Flood Risk Following the major flooding that occurred in parts of England during 2000 there is now considerable concern about the greater likelihood of flooding in the future as a result of global warming. Following the instructions in PPG25, Development and Flood Risk (the Government guidance on the topic), Sheffield has to take a risk-based approach to development and flooding and to incorporate its policy into the UDP.
Policies unlikely to change under the present review Many of the old UDP Policies touching on the green environment are not expected to change at this stage (they can be viewed on the Sheffield City Website). They included policies relating to:
All photographs are © Anne R. Beer, 2003 but users are free to download and use as they wish, with the proviso that the copyright is always acknowledged. Students may use the text as they wish provided they again acknowledge the sources of the text. To view the Case Studies
of other cities click here |
Further information about some cities is available by
clicking here 