The Hearings: Day 5 recap (part 1)
A bit later than planned, but here’s the summary from the morning session of Day 5 of the Sheffield Local Plan hearings, held on 13 October 2025.
This update focuses on the discussion around Handsworth Hall Farm / Finchwell Road (aka SES29) - what was said, the key points raised, and where things stand.
☕ This is a proper read - brew a cuppa and settle in! ☕
We’ll send Part 2 soon, featuring highlights from the Bramley Common (SES30) session held that afternoon.
👉 Check out our Hearing FAQs: an explainer on what the hearings are and why they matter for S13
Who was there?
Alongside members of the S13 campaign group and several members of the S13 community attending as observers, the session was also attended by Savills, acting as the site promoter for the Duke of Norfolk, the landowner.
Two of our local councillors, Mick Rooney and Alison Norris, were also present, together with representatives from the Sheffield & Rotherham Wildlife Trust, who had objected to the site’s inclusion in the plan because of its significant biodiversity and ecological importance.
What was said?
There were over three hours of discussion covering key topics such as transport, flooding, biodiversity, and how this site fits into the wider Waverley development.
We’ve pulled together some of the main points from that session in the summary below.
🗺️ Land Use and Layout
One of the first issues discussed was that the employment area shown in the developer’s masterplan is in a very different location from the one defined in Sheffield City Council’s allocation plan.
🏗️ What’s a Masterplan?
A masterplan is a concept plan - an illustration showing how a site might be developed, with potential housing areas, roads, and employment zones. It’s not a fixed design or commitment, and many details often change as more studies are done and applications move forward.
Savills said they want flexibility over where this employment land will sit as their plan progresses.
The employment land is intended for research and development linked to nearby advanced-manufacturing industries.
The developer also confirmed that employment development is likely to come first, effectively acting as an extension of the Waverley site just over the Rotherham border.
(Correspondent’s note: Savills’ language about this site “extending” Waverley is concerning. The whole purpose of the Green Belt is to prevent towns from merging - yet they appear to be suggesting that this site would effectively become part of Rotherham…)
Even so, the Council argued that the site “did not score highly” for preventing the merging of Sheffield and Rotherham, as the Waverley development has already reduced much of the remaining green gap between them.
This position again raised concerns among residents, who emphasised that the area is “not just a gap to be filled”. We pointed out that the Council’s own Integrated Impact Assessment acknowledges that large-scale development would negatively affect the area’s openness and rural character. To proceed regardless, we argue, would destroy the very quality the assessment identifies as most valuable - its openness.
The contradiction between the Integrated Impact Assessment and the Council’s position is striking and raises serious questions about how evidence is being applied in the decision-making process - if at all.
The site boundary also includes some Yorkshire Water land, yet no consultation has taken place. The developer has since said this land will be excluded from their masterplan.
(Correspondent’s note: Incorrect site boundaries have been a common and persistent theme throughout these site-specific hearing days. If the Council can’t even get the basics right - such as accurate surveying - how can we trust that the finer details have been handled correctly…?)
🚗 Access and Transport
Access into the site was strongly disputed at the hearing. Concerns were raised about the safety of the proposed access points.
It was revealed a transport assessment has already been carried out by Savills, but it hasn’t been made public. When asked to share it, they agreed in principle but have so far held back on releasing it.
More detailed work is still needed on junction impacts and traffic volumes, and a request was made for a study of accidents on local roads - important data that has so far been missing from all the Council’s documentation.
🚆 Wider Transport Links
The South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (SYMCA) is leading the proposal for a new Waverley rail station, but progress is uncertain:
An outline business case is expected in 2026
A full business case may follow in spring 2027
Construction is hoped to start 2028
However, there’s no committed funding yet, and these timescales were described as overly ambitious, with no confirmed completion date.
The Barrow Hill line reopening, which was meant to provide tram/train connections through the station, still isn’t confirmed. SCC said this isn’t a “showstopper”, but that could mean a station with no actual services running through it.
(Correspondent’s opinion: It was striking how little the Council seemed to know or could confirm on this topic. Given the issue’s importance to the site, that lack of detail was astonishing.)
The station won’t influence housing build-out, with first homes not expected until 2032-2033.
It was also noted that the site was proposed before the full transport assessment had been reviewed, and that infrastructure around Waverley is already under strain. This is partly because the transport mitigation for Waverley - the Waverley Link Road, first proposed in 2011 to ease pressure on Rotherham Road and Orgreave Lane - was included as a condition of the Waverley development but will now not be built.
🌧️ Flooding
Flooding remains a major local concern of residents. Sheffield City Council drew gasps from S13 residents when they brushed off the issue as a drainage problem on the Rotherham side of the road - and therefore "not their problem" - although they said it would be looked at again at the planning application stage.
🌿 Biodiversity and Green Belt
The Council’s Green/Blue Infrastructure and Green Belt Compensatory Strategies are still in development, meaning there is currently no clear detail on how the loss of nature or green space will be managed - a recurring concern raised by the Sheffield & Rotherham Wildlife Trust throughout the Local Plan hearings.
Two Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) have been identified on the site, which should each have a 15-metre buffer from any development. There’s still no site-specific wildlife evidence available.
These LWS are excluded from SCC’s allocation, but included by Savills for further study.
A comprehensive ecological evidence base is expected by Easter 2026.
The Ancient Woodland near Waverley Pond hasn’t been properly accounted for, and the current masterplan isolates this woodland area.
(Correspondent’s opinion: How can these sites be put forward for allocation when key evidence and assessments are still missing?)
⚠️ Key Issues Raised
In summary, the S13 group consistently raised these points with the Inspector, highlighting the fundamental flaws of this site allocation:
Overall, the proposed development timescales appear overly ambitious, casting doubt on the deliverability of the Local Plan.
The delivery of houses appears to be overestimated for such a complex site — exceeding the industry-standard Lichfields forecasts, which provide evidence-based estimates of realistic build-out rates for similar sites.
Once the correct boundaries and local wildlife buffers are set, housing capacity could fall short by around 200 homes.
There are land ownership gaps, and Yorkshire Water have not consulted over on-site sewers and other infrastructure.
Development of this site would further erode the gap between Sheffield and Rotherham, effectively merging the two settlements.
The Ancient Woodland on the site has not been not fully assessed.
The biodiversity data is out-of-date, with no agreed mitigation strategy.
There’s no confirmed funding or timeline for the Barrow Hill line or Waverley station.
The employment zone shown in a different location to SCC’s plan.
Savills’ transport assessment exists but hasn’t been released for public scrutiny.
There was a great deal of intense discussion about Handsworth Hall Farm, and it’s difficult to capture everything in a single email.
Over the next few weeks, we’ll be rewatching the hearing livestream to pick up any details we missed.
Hopefully, this summary provides a good overview of the main points raised with the government inspectors, so far.
The Hearings: News Articles
You can explore all the latest coverage on our website’s Press Articles page, where we’re adding new pieces every day as they come in.
👍 Support the cause
Photo competition
Don’t forget our photo competition. We’re looking for photos of our beautiful S13 green belt to include in our 2026 calendar.
See competition details on the website.
Details on how to buy the 2026 calendar in local shops, ready for Christmas, will follow soon.
Contact
If you want to get in touch please email us at either:
info@saves13greenbelt.org.uk - email the working group.
website@saves13greenbelt.org.uk - suggestions/additions to the website.
