Full text:
DLP Planning Ltd, on behalf of Sheffield Football Club submit this representation to the Reg. 18 Issues and Options Consultation 2025 to promote Sheffield Football Club, Sheffield Road, Dronfield, S18 2GP (the ‘Submission Site’; site ref. 45158) as a housing allocation in the forthcoming Local Plan Review.
The current Reg. 18 Consultation follows last year’s Issues & Options Consultation and focuses on the strategic approach to the location of development and refined sites. It is our understanding that the refined sites were further assessed as part of the Council’s Housing Land Availability Assessment (Housing LAA). This consultation, however, does not propose any site allocations and we note that the current Green Belt review in support of the draft Plan will only be finished by June this year.
Please note that the Submission Site was also submitted to the Council for pre-application advice in autumn 2023. The proposals at the time included affordable housing and older persons housing (bungalows). The proposals were then further developed to include care home provision onsite.
The above parties would welcome a discussion with Officers to consider the most effective way to deliver the Submission Site over the period of a new Local Plan.
Proposed Approach to the Location of Development/Spatial Distribution
The Council’s previous consultation included questions on the overall approach to the spatial distribution of development, and an analysis of the findings informed their proposed approach to the location of development. The Council now identify Priority 1 Locations which include Edges of Chesterfield/Sheffield; New Settlement/Strategic Sites; and, Level 1 Settlements – Main Towns.
We understand that the Council’s proposed approach to the location of development is informed by their Settlement Hierarchy Topic Paper. As in the adopted Local Plan, the four towns of Clay Cross, Dronfield, Eckington and Killamarsh are the Level 1 settlements being the most sustainable location
Ref: D5074/5P Reg.18 Rep
Date: 26th March 2026
2
for new development. Dronfield, however, is set apart from the other towns as it is considerably larger than the other towns in the district and it is the only town with a train station.
Nevertheless, since the adoption of the current Local Plan most houses have been built in the south of the district, but this is in contradiction to the current Plan’s spatial strategy as distribution of development and housing delivery is sought in all four Level 1 towns. Except for Clay Cross, all towns are in the north of the district, but they have not seen any significant development in recent years despite being in close proximity to Sheffield where the housing need is greatest.
Hence, a change in the distribution of development is required with a particular focus on the north of the district including Dronfield. The submission site is readily available and can help with delivering additional houses along the A61 / B6057 corridor. It is anticipated that the submission site could deliver between 50 and 60 dwellings onsite, and should, therefore, be positively considered as it would make a substantial contribution to the Council’s housing land supply in the north of the district.
Further to this, development of the Submission Site would also deliver urgently needed affordable homes alongside older persons housing or a care home facility. Both will be a great benefit to the local community.
Settlement Hierarchy & Sustainability
As the location of development is a critical aspect of achieving sustainable development, allocating the Submission Site for housing in Dronfield should be supported.
The Submission Site contains an existing public house which will be retained onsite, it is adjacent to two bus stops on Sheffield Road and is near several shops, a petrol station/convenience store, restaurants, a supermarket, etc. along Sheffield Road. A primary school and Marsh Avenue recreation site are circa. 950 metres away from the Submission Site. Dronfield Town Centre is circa. 850 metres to the south of the Submission Site, containing a supermarket, a range of shops, hot foot takeaways, restaurants, a civic centre, medical centre, library, church and several other facilities.
The frequent 43 bus route traverses Sheffield Road, to Dronfield Town Centre, Sheffield and Chesterfield, 7 days a week with 2 buses an hour at peak times. Dronfield railway station is circa 1.2km away and connects to regional services to Chesterfield, Nottingham, Sheffield and Leeds.
Further to this, the Council’s early consultation work to inform the Issues and Options Consultation indicated that, in general, most people are willing to walk up to 20 minutes for frequently used services, particularly local convenience stores, green spaces, primary schools, and GP surgeries. The Submission Site is, therefore, in an accessible and sustainable location that benefits the local community.
Currently, the ‘Sustainable Communities LAA Rating’ of the Housing LAA scores ‘Red’ for the Submission Site as the Council are awaiting results of the 2026 Green Belt review; once available, this should be improved based on the above findings and the 2026 Green Belt review.
Green Belt/grey belt
As the Council is aware the planning policy landscape for Green Belt/grey belt assessments has considerably changed and they confirm that the 2026 Green Belt review will be based on the detailed methodology set out in recent Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) with a clear focus on Green Belt Purpose A, B and D.
3
Within our previous written representation, we have set out a grey belt assessment for the Submission Site based on the recently revised PPG in more detail. In summary, we found for Purpose A – to check the unrestricted sprawl of large urban areas – that there is a significant level of built form within the submission site, including a football pitch, stands, ancillary buildings, hardstanding, car parking and a public house.
Further to this, the submission site is enclosed by a well-defined boundary, with a woodland buffer to the north, Sheffield Road to the east, a railway line to the southwest and the A61 to the west. These features all contribute to an enclosed, rather than open, character.
In addition, the illustrative Masterplan for the Submission Site (as previously presented to the Council) has been designed to accommodate the site’s topography. The design would integrate development alongside the woodland to the north, the railway line to the southwest and Sheffield Road to the east. Consequently, the development of the site would avoid “unrestricted sprawl”.
Given the existing built form onsite, strong boundaries/ enclosed nature, and the rising topography to the north, the Submission Site should be given a weak score in relation to Purpose A.
Regarding Purpose B – to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another – the Submission Site is a small area of land within the current Green Belt but its contribution to maintaining the separation between Dronfield and Sheffield is negligible. Notably, the section of Sheffield Road up to the Bowshaw Roundabout to the north of the Submission Site is characterised by residential development, with the Submission Site forming a gap in the otherwise continuous built frontage leading out of Dronfield.
Further to this, the visual separation of the Submission Site can be contained. From the A61 approaching Bowshaw Roundabout and Jordanthorpe Parkway to the north, the Submission Site is not visible due to existing vegetation next to the roundabout, along the main roads and existing built form along Sheffield Road. From Sheffield Road, approaching the Submission Site from the south, the site is hardly visible due to existing vegetation along Wreakes Lane and the site’s southern boundary. When approaching the submission site from Wreakes Lane to the south, views onto the Submission Site are also limited due to existing vegetation and built form.
It is therefore considered that development of the Submission Site would result in a limited and imperceptible reduction in the level of separation between the southern boundary of Sheffield and the northern boundary at Dronfield.
Regarding Purpose D – to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns – the PPG makes clear that where there are no historic towns in the plan area, it may not be necessary to provide detailed assessments against this purpose. This is the case here.
Overall, it is considered that the Submission Site does not strongly contribute to Green Belt Purposes A, B or D and it does not cover nor affect areas or assets as listed in footnote 7 (other than Green Belt), and hence, do not provide a strong reason for refusing development. Taken together, it is considered that the Submission Site can be identified as grey belt land.
Loss of existing sports provision
Local Plan Policy ID10 states that development proposals that would result in the loss of existing
4
facilities will not be permitted, unless the loss would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location. Equally, paragraph 104 of the NPPF requires that on existing open space, sports and recreational building should not be built unless exceptions a) to c) apply (exception c being the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location).
As the Council is aware, Sheffield FC has the desire to relocate their grounds back to Sheffield to create a new football stadium with ancillary facilities including training grounds, indoor facilities, etc.
During the pre-application enquiry in 2023, the Council consulted with Sport England as statutory consultee who advised that the applicant should explore Policy Exception 4 (equivalent to exception c in the NPPF) and look to create a new playing field in the locality. Replacement must represent a genuine replacement, however, Sport England would accept that “the quantity element can be addressed by bringing into use areas of an existing playing field that are currently incapable of supporting a pitch or pitches without significant works”. It is considered that as part of any outline planning application an assessment will be undertaken to establish the performance of the existing areas of playing field and the programme of works (including pitch construction) for the creation of the proposed replacement area of playing field.
Within the Housing LAA, it is noted that “although the football ground does not cover the entire area of the site, residential development would result in the loss of further land, which would affect the operational ability for the ground to function. In particular the land in the south, which is needed for highway access.” The Health & Wellbeing LAA rating within the Housing LAA was adjusted by officer to a ‘Red’ score. However, please note that the current playing pitch only covers around a quarter of the site area and, as outlined above, Sheffield FC’s intention is to relocate entirely to Sheffield. In addition, existing areas of playing fields in the locality will be assessed with the aim to create a replacement pitch in Dronfield.
Further Sustainability Issues Raised
•
Access – The Council notes in their assessment that according to the Highway Authority the existing access serving the site is considered satisfactory for the proposed development and it is wide enough to allow two vehicles to pass each other at low speeds. The topography was raised as an issue to overcome, and a Transport Plan and Transport Assessment would be required. These comments are noted.
•
Ecology/Biodiversity – The Ecology/Biodiversity Officer comments that there are no known features of high nature conservation value. However, there are small areas of broad-leaved woodland, riparian habitat and the river Drone. Development would need to establish a buffer to the river and retain woodland habitats to minimise impacts. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) and a Bat Roost Assessment of Existing Buildings has already been undertaken. The site comprises modified grassland, species-poor other neutral grassland, an area of woodland, and hardstanding. Regarding bats, it was found that no further surveys of the buildings/structures are recommended as they have negligible suitability to support roosting bats. The PEA concluded that subject to further recommended Phase II surveys, if the outlined mitigation measures are implemented in full then no significant residual impact could be expected.
•
Heritage/Archaeology – The Archaeology Officer commented that the former Coach and Horses Inn (MDR15613) is a landmark building and it is presumed for retention/re-use. It was scored ‘Amber’ because of significant archaeological/historic environment issues but might
5
be suitable for allocation with appropriate site-specific policy. The existing Coach & Horses Pub will be retained as a main feature of any future development of the Submission Site and as stated by the Planning Officer of the pre-application, “has the potential to be a real asset to the development and community in general.”
•
Landscape – The Council noted that “despite being in Green Belt, there are no significant landscape constraints affecting the land, which is relatively contained visually.” To this end, it is considered that a Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment may be needed to determine any potential negative impacts on the wider landscape. This can also inform a Green Belt Assessment of the Submission Site as referred to above.
•
Coal Mining – The Council found that the Submission Site is located within a Coal Authority development high risk area. To investigate this risk further, a Coal Mining Risk Assessment can be provided; based on this, potential risks can be identified and mitigation measures implemented within the layout of the scheme.
Summary and Conclusion
The Submission Site:
•
Is readily available and located within the most sustainable settlement.
•
Makes an important contribution to the Council’s housing land supply, particularly in the north of the district.
•
Comprises a significant level of built form; it is well contained by physical features and existing infrastructure and is well screened by existing woodland and built form when viewed from the north and south; therefore, it would not affect the open character of the Green Belt between Sheffield and Dronfield.
•
Does not strongly contribute to Green Belt Purposes A, B or D;
Therefore, the Submission Site should be allocated for housing in the emerging Local Plan.
