SHEFFIELD CITY COUNCIL Development, Environment and Leisure Directorate

REPORT TO CITY CENTRE SOUTH AND EAST PLANNING DATE 23/11/2009 AND HIGHWAYS AREA BOARD

REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEM

SUBJECT APPLICATIONS UNDER VARIOUS ACTS/REGULATIONS

SUMMARY

RECOMMENDATIONS

SEE RECOMMENDATIONS HEREIN

THE BACKGROUND PAPERS ARE IN THE FILES IN RESPECT OF THE PLANNING APPLICATIONS NUMBERED.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS N/A PARAGRAPHS

CLEARED BY

BACKGROUND PAPERS

CONTACT POINT FOR Lucy Bond TEL 0114 2734556 ACCESS Chris Heeley NO: 0114 2736329

AREA(S) AFFECTED

CATEGORY OF REPORT

OPEN

Application No. Location Page No.

09/03212/FUL The Walnut Club Brook House 6 557 Ecclesall Road Sheffield S11 8PR

09/03069/LBC 2 Haymarket And 5-7 Commercial Street Sheffield 16 S1 1PF

09/03065/FUL 2 Haymarket And 5-7 Commercial Street Sheffield 22 S1 1PF

09/02978/FUL Parking Bay Opposite The Hicks Building (University Of Sheffield) 33 Hounsfield Road Sheffield S3 7RF

09/02887/LBC Sheffield Midland Station Sheaf Street 36 Sheffield S1 2BP

09/02815/FUL Beauchief Tennis Club 35 Cockshutt Avenue 56 Sheffield S8 7DU

09/02802/CHU 286 Attercliffe Road Sheffield 62 S4 7WZ

09/02791/FUL 286 Attercliffe Road Sheffield 71 S4 7WZ

09/02729/RG3 15/15A Victoria Road Broomhall 76 Sheffield S10 2DJ

09/02637/FUL Land At Junction With Park Grange Road Beldon Road 82 Sheffield

09/02591/FUL The Point 69 Division Street Sheffield 94 S1 4GE

09/02565/FUL 17-21 Charter Square Sheffield 101 S1 4HS

09/02493/FUL Land Adjacent Damons Sevenairs Road 106 Sheffield

09/02424/FUL 117 Rockingham Street Sheffield 131 S1 4EB

09/02033/FUL Land East Of Alison Centre And Rear Of Manor Community Childcare Centre 138 Alison Crescent Sheffield

09/01676/CHU Former Hatfields Garages Ltd Abbeydale Road South 169 Sheffield S17 3LH

09/01520/LBC Haqqani House Vincent Road 182 Sheffield S7 1BX

09/01519/FUL Haqqani House Vincent Road 191 Sheffield S7 1BX

09/00055/FUL University Of Sheffield 156 Broomspring Lane 206 Sheffield S10 2FD

08/05959/LBC Sheffield Central Library Surrey Street 212 Sheffield S1 1XZ

4 5 SHEFFIELD CITY COUNCIL

Report Of The Head Of Planning, Transport And Highways, Development, Environment And Leisure To The CITY CENTRE, SOUTH AND EAST Planning And Highways Area Board Date Of Meeting: 23/11/2009

LIST OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DECISION OR INFORMATION

*NOTE* Under the heading “Representations” a Brief Summary of Representations received up to a week before the Area Board date is given (later representations will be reported verbally). The main points only are given for ease of reference. The full letters are on the application file, which is available to members and the public and will be at the meeting.

Case Number 09/03212/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Application for a 6 month trial period to extend opening hours of restaurant from 2300 hours to 0030 hours (Application under Section 73 to vary condition 5 (opening hours) imposed by 06/04588/FUL)

Location The Walnut Club Brook House 557 Ecclesall Road Sheffield S11 8PR

Date Received 14/10/2009

Team SOUTH

Applicant/Agent Mr R Mills

Recommendation Refuse

For the following reason(s):

1 The Local Planning Authority consider that the proposed extended hours of use of the restaurant would result in unacceptable noise and disturbance to occupiers of nearby residential properties as a result of people leaving the restaurant late at night when background noise levels have subsided. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies S10 (b) and H14 (k) of the adopted Sheffield Unitary Development Plan.

Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application relates to the Walnut Club, located at 557 Ecclesall Road at first floor level. The site falls within a District Shopping Centre with a small section fronting Neill Road. Ecclesall Road is characterised by a range of specialist shops and by a variety of food and drink establishments and professional services.

The closest residential properties are located on the opposite side of Ecclesall Road, and to the rear of the application site, along Neill Road and Porter Terrace.

The current planning permission (06/04588/FUL) restricts the hours of use of the restaurant/bar to 0900 hours and 2330 hours Mondays to Saturdays and 0900 and 2300 hours Sundays and Public Holidays.

7 This application seeks to extend the permitted hours of use to 00:30 on all days for a trial period of 6 months.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

Planning permission for the existing use was granted in January 2007 (ref. 06/04588/FUL). A condition attached to the permission restricts the opening hours to between 09:00 hours and 23:30 hours (23:00 hours on Sundays and Public Holidays. This planning permission included a first floor extension to the Neill Road elevation and an enclosed decked area (no access for customers). These elements of the permission have not been implemented to date but could be lawfully added in the future without the need for further consents.

An application was submitted in October 2008 to extend the opening hours of the premises on Mondays to Saturdays until 02:00 hours. This application was refused at the City Centre South and East Area Board on the grounds of dis-amenity to neighbouring properties.

A subsequent application was submitted and refused in August 2009 for a trial period of 6 months to extend the opening hours of the premises on Fridays and Saturdays only, to 01:30 hours. This application was also refused at the City Centre South and East Area Board on the grounds of dis-amenity to neighbouring properties.

The building was previously a children’s play and music centre (Class D1) (ref. 04/01722/CHU). Prior to that it had been used as offices (Class B1) and as a Co- op food store (Class A1).

Planning permissions relating to other bar/restaurant uses in the Ecclesall Road District Shopping Centre are referred to in subsequent sections.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

24 letters of representation have been received objecting to the proposed development. Issues raised include:

- A previous application was refused on 11 August 2009 because it would result in unacceptable noise and disturbance to occupiers of nearby residential properties. This would be equally true of an extension to 12:30 hours. - There have been two recent Planning Inspector decisions at the Porter Brook and Nonna’s declining their requests to open beyond 23:30 hours. - This is a residential area; opening later will mean that noise is experienced at a more unreasonable hours. - Taxis will idle outside the venue, and then sound their horns and car doors will be slammed. - A precedent should not be set by this application, for the adjacent 5 restaurants and bars. - This is the third application to extend their opening hours and nothing has changed.

8 - Customers wishing to smoke would need to stand outside the venue creating external noise into the early hours. - Ecclesall Road is busy during the day but at night is quiet, people leaving in the premises will noisy with sound carrying much further. - There will be an increase in litter from intoxicated patrons. - The application for an extension seems to be an attempt by the owners to change the nature of the premises from a restaurant into a night club. - Repeated reapplication for this extension is a waste of the council officers and elected councillors time and hence a waste of council tax payers money. - Midnight should be the extreme that the local community can tolerate. - Ecclesall Road is an avenue of restaurants and bars and there may become a time when another area becomes trendy and there could be a decline with empty business/shop sites. - The idea of late night drinking is fine in principle in the city centre, but not in residential suburbs. - Increase use of the premises will cause additional parking difficulties in the area. - Camel Court opposite the premises is a retirement home, and the extra opening hours will cause unacceptable noise problems to residents. - It was made clear to the Walnut Club that late night opening was not acceptable in this location and they should look to the city centre for a suitable premise. - The proposal would be contrary to Policies S10 (b) and H14(k).

21 letters of support have been received (3 additional named letters have been received in favour, however do not have a full postal address or email address and therefore have not been noted).

- Give local businesses a chance, the extra hour would be minimal. - Making this a busier venue would be a good thing for the immediate local economy and should be supported. - This is a quality establishment which is a restaurant at first floor level. If it becomes noisy after 6 months it should be revoked. - There are already bars in the area benefiting from late closure; it seems unfair that this business is being selected as unsuitable. - This is not a student bar where people are spilling onto the streets and making noise, this time extension should be allowed in this 21st century city. - As a student, it’s nice to go to the Walnut Club without the student prejudice present, and without having the full on drunk student presence

A letter from the applicant has been received stating:

- There will be a 24 hour Tesco off license in the same building next month which means customers will just move down stairs. 12:30 is a reasonable hour for people to finish dining and have a drink and relax afterwards. - This is a first floor venue, so no street level noise or visible from the street to disturb residents.

9 - Furthermore, the Walnut Club is targeting mature and adult dinners.

Nick Clegg MP wrote stating;

I would be grateful if you would consider my constituents objections when reaching your decision, these include concern over the extension of opening hours bringing unwanted noise early in the morning when people are asleep in the residential area, and this is the Walnut Club’s third application for extension of hours in less than 2 years.

Councillor Colin France wrote stating;

I object to this application and support local residents who are also objecting. Previous appeal inspectors have found in favour of local residents and stopped two nearby establishments at Nonna’s and the Porter Brook. If the Walnut Club are allowed a trial, it will just chip away until the Walnut Club becomes a night club. Furthermore, extra taxi’s driving around or parked locally will increase and it is already a problem.

Councillor Paul Scriven wrote stating;

I object to the proposed extension of hours, the premises is opposite a complex for older people, comprising of 12 units and would feel it would cause a loss of amenity for the people who live in Wilson Court, along with people who live to the rear of the Walnut Club. On the whole I support this business but feel due to its location that is should not be able to extend its opening hours.

Councillor Patricia White wrote stating;

I do not want this business to become a night club, which would cause disharmony to those who live close by.

Botanical Area Community Association

The Walnut Club has a capacity of 150 people, which would suggest a large number of people leaving the building in the early hours of the morning. This would lead to an increase in traffic noise, car doors slamming, taxi traffic and illegal parking.

The circumstances have not changed since 2006 when the original planning permission was restricted to 23:30 hours. The hours sought are suitable only for non-residential areas.

Parking on the surrounding streets is a problem outside of the residents parking times, with the extension of opening hours shifting the problem even later at night than it is already.

10 There are currently 6 restaurants/ bars in the immediate area, (between 509-565 Ecclesall Road) 5 of which have outdoor seating areas. If this application were allowed, those establishments would no doubt all seek similar extensions, creating an unmanageable and intolerable situation for the whole area.

Botanical Gate Community Association

All of the reasons for which the original application to extend the hours beyond 23:00 hours apply just as much to 6 months. A trial would prove nothing without a survey measuring the extra noise and other disturbance created specially by late leavers from the Walnut Club. The appropriate time for premises to close in mixed areas is 23:00 hours.

Sharrow Vale Community Association

The Inspectorate did not mention trial periods in either recent case (Porter Brook and Nonna’s) and as the report was very thorough ask you to make a decision in this case to respect the Inspectorates decision.

There is a saturation point of venues in our area, and residents have had enough. Nothing has changed since the previous refusal and this application should be refused on the same grounds.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Land Use Policies

The majority of the site lies within the Ecclesall Road District Shopping Centre, as defined in the Unitary Development Plan (UDP). The Neill Road frontage is within a designated Housing Area. UDP Policies S10 (Conditions on Development in Shopping Areas) and H14 (Conditions on Development in Housing Areas) are most relevant in considering the merits of the application.

Policy S10 (b) and H14 (k) requires that developments should not cause residents to suffer from unacceptable living conditions, including air pollution, noise, other nuisance or risk to health and safety.

Residential Amenity Issues

The application seeks to extend the hours of use of the premises until 00:30 hours 7 days a week on a 6 month trial basis. The main considerations in assessing the proposal are the impact on the amenities of the locality and occupiers of residential properties that may result from any later opening. It must also be taken into account the possibility of setting a precedent for later opening hours of other restaurants and public houses in the vicinity.

The applicant requested opening until 02:00 hours prior to submitting the original application for planning permission for the Club in 2006. At the time the applicant was advised that whilst the Walnut Club concept was welcomed, it should not be at

11 the expense of residential amenity in a finely balanced community which is under constant pressure from food and drink businesses.

It was made clear that late night opening was not considered acceptable in this location. The applicant was advised to seek alternative premises, preferably in the City Centre or at the edge of the City Centre, away from traditional residential areas if opening in the early hours is necessary to the operation.

However, the applicant’s preference was for this location having carried out a survey of preferred locations amongst his existing customers and having regard to other late night licences in Ecclesall Road. Following full consideration by the Planning Board, which resulted in the current hours being imposed in line with the officer recommendation, the Walnut Club opened in the full knowledge that later opening hours were not considered acceptable. This was reinforced by the refusal of planning permission for an extension of hours until 0200 hours by the Planning Board in November 2008.

Subsequent to this an application for the extension of hours on Fridays and Saturdays only, until 01:30 hours was refused by the City Centre South and East Planning Board in August 2009.

The concern is not disturbance from within the building, but disturbance from customers leaving in the early hours of the morning. The principal concern is for residents on the opposite side of Ecclesall Road and in Wilson Road which lies virtually opposite the entrance to the building. The building has capacity for approximately 150 people, and therefore it is likely that there will be large numbers of people leaving the building in the early hours of the morning.

Each application is to be taken on it’s on merits, however regard does need to be given to the surrounding area, especially with similar and recent applications.

Ecclesall Road is a long and linear road which is clearly delineated into two distinct areas. The lower stretch (city centre end) of Ecclesall Road has always been a popular evening entertainment area, where there are a large number of pubs, bars and restaurants which are very popular with both students and the general population e.g., the Pomona, the Varsity, the Nursery Tavern and Champs. This area is very lively at night, especially at the weekends.

The upper stretch (Hunter’s Bar end) of Ecclesall Road has traditionally been a bustling daytime mixed retail and service sector, where the local community is currently well, but finely, balanced and includes families and elderly persons with the need for times of relative peace and quiet. The area currently reflects the key planning objective of creating sound and sustainable communities but could be under considerable threat in the absence of adequate residential amenity

In recent years the number of bars and restaurants has increased along this section of Ecclesall Road, but opening opening hours have been restricted to 23:30 hours. These include Felicini, La Tasca, Nonna’s, and the Porter Brook.

12 There have been several applications from neighbouring restaurant/bars recently applying to extend their opening hours. These include an hours of use extension until midnight (00.30 hours Fri/Sat) at La Tasca in January 2007 which was refused (06/04327/FUL).

The Porter Brook has been granted a licence until 01.00 hours on Fridays and Saturdays, but this is inconsistent with the planning permission which permits opening only until 23.30 hours. An application for later opening hours (midnight Mon-Thu, 01:00 hours Fri-Sat and 23:30 hours Sun) was refused in February 2008 (07/03510/FUL).

An application for extended opening hours at Nonna’s restaurant to 01:30 hours (Mon-Sat) and 23:30 hours (Sun) was also refused on amenity grounds (ref.07/03386/FUL).

Both the Porter Brook and Nonna’s appealed the decisions, and both Inspectors’s subsequently dismissed the appeals in December 2008 and January 2009.

The Inspectors concluded that ‘Later closing times would extend the potential for noise and disturbance later into the night to the detriment of the amenity of those living in and around this part of Ecclesall Road. Noise and disturbance can come from customers talking or even shouting as they gather outside or walk away from the premises after closing time. Noise and disturbance can also come from customers being picked up by family or friends in cars or getting into taxi’s, involving engines being stopped and started and car doors being slammed. Furthermore this activity may not necessarily be confined to Ecclesall Road but to numerous side streets as customers disperse. Talking and shouting in the quieter ambience of narrower residential side streets are likely to be particularly intrusive.’

It is accepted that background noise levels are consistently high late into the evenings in Ecclesall Road due to passing vehicular and pedestrian traffic. However, the level of activity on this stretch of Ecclesall Road tends to subside when the various food and drink premises close in accordance with their permitted hours of use.

A license has recently been granted for a new One Stop Shop/ Supermarket directly below this application site at ground floor level. No change of use planning application is required as it remains in A1 (Retail) Use Class. As a result there is no restriction on the opening hours. The license has been granted for 24 hours a day on everyday of the week, and includes the selling of alcohol. The supermarket has not been implemented to date, however it is consider highly likely it will be in the near future.

Whilst it is inevitable that this new supermarket will generate a degree of noise and disturbance throughout the day and night, it will not lead to the mass exodus of a large amount of people leaving the premises in the early hours of the morning.

There is evidence from the city centre that extending the opening hours of licensed premises extends the period of noise in the street, as patrons leave the premise(s) and disperse into the immediate area and beyond.

Later opening hours will undoubtedly have an impact on the standard of amenity experienced by residents living in close proximity to bars, clubs and pubs. The character of the area can be changed. The period of noisy disturbance from the premise extends beyond the proposed closing time, as customers will be leaving the premises later and possibly entering a previously quiet street/area as they make their way home or to the next venue. Noise in the street later at night means the actual period of quiet time for residents can be significantly reduced with its consequential impact on their health and well being.

Extending the opening hours of this premise will have the potential to adversely affect the amenity of neighbouring residents. Consideration must also be given to the cumulative effect of a number of premises along this road applying for permission to extend their opening hours.

The consequence of such activity would be a change in the character of the area from a daytime mixed retail, service and residential to a late night entertainment in which the period of noise disturbance in the street would be extended into the early hours of the morning with the resultant adverse impact on the amenity of the residents.

The current use of the building is marketed by the applicant as a fine dining venue, however planning permission would not be required to change the mode of the operation in the future.

The applicant has submitted the Premise Licence Summary which involves extended hours until 01:30 on Fridays and Saturdays. The licensing system and planning controls have different roles to play. The licensing system deals with public safety, prevent of public nuisance, the prevention of crime and disorder and the like. It does not deal directly with effect of residential amenity. This is essentially a matter for the planning system.

The applicant seeks a 6 month trial period to extend the opening hours until 00:30, on all days of the week. Whilst a number of representations have been received in favour of the application, these appear to be from customers of the Walnut Club, and from the postal address’s given, the writers do not live within the immediate vicinity. Therefore little weight can be attached to these as a representation of local opinion on the proposals.

On the basis of the substantial number of representations received objecting to this application and those for the previous applications of a similar nature at Nonna’s and the Porter Brook, it is considered that there is genuine concern of dis-amenity from the extended opening hours.

Furthermore, the dis-amenity was also acknowledged by the two individual Inspectors in the two recent appeals, and therefore it is not considered appropriate for a trial period of any length.

14 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The applicant requested opening until 02:00 hours prior to submitting the original application for planning permission for the Club (ref 06/04588/FUL). At the time the applicant was advised that whilst the Walnut Club concept was welcomed, it should not be at the expense of residential amenity in a finely balanced community which is under constant pressure from food and drink businesses. It was made clear that late night opening was not considered acceptable in this location.

The permitted hours are consistent with all Class A3/A4 uses in close proximity to the site that are subject to planning permissions. Applications for extended opening hours at other food and drink premises in the immediate area have been consistently refused. Two such applications (Porter Brook and Nonna’s) were the subject of appeals, in which both appeals were dismissed by the Inspector’s.

A number of representations have been received in favour of the application, however these appear to be from customers of the Walnut Club, and from the postal addresses do not live within the immediate vicinity. Therefore little weight can be attached to these as a representation of local opinion on the proposals.

The representations received objecting to the proposal indicate that customers leaving the premises already cause some degree of noise disturbance both from raised voices and vehicular activity. The extended opening hours can also reasonably be expected to attract a significant number of additional taxis to Ecclesall Road long after traffic levels have normally subsided in the area. Such activities will significantly reduce amenity in the residential side roads if the use is permitted to extend further into the night when background noise levels are lower.

The change in circumstance with the future use of the ground floor of the building as a 24 hour supermarket, having a license to sell alcohol, will likely result in an increase in the level of disturbance throughout the night, however this does will not outweigh the level of disturbance likely to be generated by the mass exodus of a large number of people from a restaurant/bar in the early hours of the morning, and furthermore, is unrestricted by planning legislation.

The current restriction on the hours of use is considered necessary to maintain adequate residential amenity in the adjoining Housing Areas late at night. The level of noise and disturbance in the street resulting from the later opening hours, particularly when combined with other late night uses likely to arise from the precedent that would be set, would be contrary to Policies S10(b) and H14(k).

In view of the above, it is recommended that variation of the permitted opening hours is refused.

Case Number 09/03069/LBC

Application Type Listed Building Consent Application

Proposal Extension and alterations to upper floors, and change of use to form 11 flats (Resubmission of application no. 08/05879/LBC)

Location 2 Haymarket And 5-7 Commercial Street Sheffield S1 1PF

Date Received 01/10/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent Whymark And Moulton

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Regulations 1990.

2 The proposed facing materials shall match the facing materials to the existing building.

In the interests of the visual amenities of the locality.

3 Before the development is commenced, details of all proposed external materials and finishes, including windows, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

4 A sample panel of the proposed masonry shall be erected on the site and shall illustrate the colour, texture, bedding and bonding of masonry and mortar finish to be used. The sample panel shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the building works and shall be retained for verification purposes until the completion of such works.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

16 5 Prior to commencement of works, details of the extent and specification of brick/stone repair and cleaning shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure that the fabric of the building is not damaged

6 Before the commencement of development, large scale details, including materials and finishes, at a minimum of 1:20 of the items listed below shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

Roof materials Ridge Valleys Eaves Verges Parapet Cornice

Thereafter, the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

7 Notwithstanding the drawings hereby approved:

(i) revised elevational details at 1:100 of the glazed and rendered ends of the proposed second floor extension to 5-7 Commercial Street, (ii) a section at 1:20 showing revised detailed elevational treatment (including modelling, mouldings and reveals) of the proposed second floor extension,

shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced, and the development shall not be occupied unless the work has been carried out in accordance with such approved revised details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

8 All the rainwater gutters, downpipes and external plumbing shall be of cast iron or cast aluminium construction and painted black unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Gutters shall be fixed by means of hangers and brackets and no fascia boards shall be used.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

9 Chimney stacks and pots shall be retained and, where repaired, should be reinstated to their original appearance using materials to match existing unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

17 In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

10 Existing windows and shutters shall be retained and repaired unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to protect the original fabric of the building and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

11 Notwithstanding the drawings hereby approved the first and second floor windows to the rear elevation of 2 Haymarket shall only be provided in accordance with a revised design replicating the historic window pattern that shall have received the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

In order to protect the original fabric of the building and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

12 Before the commencement of development, the details, specifications and finish of the new windows, including elevations and sections, shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Drawings shall be of a minimum of 1:10 scale and shall include details of proposed section sizes at a minimum of 1:1 scale. (Details shall include: reveal depths, double glazing, secondary glazing, shutters, mouldings, architraves, location of trickle vents). Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

13 All internal and external doors shall be retained unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to protect the character of the original building.

14 Before the development commences, details, specifications and finishes of all new internal and external doors, including frame section sizes, reveal depths and any mouldings and architraves at a minimum of 1:10 scale shall have been approved in writing by the Local planning Authority. Thereafter, the new doors shall be installed in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

15 Before the development commences, details of all new joinery and timber structural elements and/or the repair, alteration or replacement of existing timber elements (including roof and floor timbers, partitions, stairs, balustrades, screens, wainscoting) shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans.

In order to protect the character of the original building.

18 16 Before the development commences, details of the new internal floor structure and its abutment with the existing building structure shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

17 Before the development commences, a schedule of all fixtures and fittings, with a photographic record, and details of their retention, repair, removal or relocation shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule.

In order to protect the character of the original building.

18 Before the development commences, details of how cornices, skirtings, architraves, picture rails, dados, embossed wallcoverings and other decorative features are to repaired, replaced, altered, reproduced and protected during building works shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

19 Before the development commences, details and locations of all new decorative works shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

20 Before the development commences, the design and location of all new internal and external light fittings shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

21 Before the development commences, details of the location, specification and appearance of all new services to the building (including meter boxes, outlets and inlets for gas, electricity, telephones, security systems, cabling, trunking, soil and vent stacks, fresh and foul water supply and runs, heating, air conditioning, ventilation, extract and odour control equipment, pipe runs and internal and external ducting) shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

22 Before the development commences, details of installations and alterations arising from the requirements of fire protection, means of escape, acoustic attenuation and insulation, natural and mechanical ventilation, disabled

19 access and the provision of natural and artificial lighting shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

23 The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the drawings hereby approved:

Drawing No’s : 07/158-07 Rev B 07/158-04 Rev D 07/158-05 Rev C 07/158-08 Rev B 07/158-09 Rev A 07/158-06 Rev B

(as may be subsequently revised in compliance with conditions) unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to define the permission.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

1. The decision to grant listed building consent and impose any conditions has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in the Sheffield Unitary Development Plan and adopted Core Strategy set out below:

BE5 - Building Design and Siting BE19 - Development affecting Listed Buildings

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

This informative is intended as a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission. For further detail on the decision please see the application report by contacting the Planning Records section on 2734220 or by visiting Sheffield City Council’s website at www.sheffield.gov.uk/your- city-council/council-meetings/planning-boards

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. Failure to carry out this development in accordance with the approved plans may result in enforcement action. Please contact the Planning Department if you wish to amend any design or specifications for your proposed development.

20 Site Location

See 09/03065/FUL for report.

Case Number 09/03065/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Extension and alterations to upper floors, and change of use to form 11 flats (Resubmission of application no. 08/05878/FUL)

Location 2 Haymarket And 5-7 Commercial Street Sheffield S1 1PF

Date Received 01/10/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent Whymark And Moulton

Recommendation GRA GC subject to Legal Agreement

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act.

2 The proposed facing materials shall match the facing materials to the existing building.

In the interests of the visual amenities of the locality.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

22 5 Prior to commencement of works, details of the extent and specification of brick/stone repair and cleaning shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure that the fabric of the building is not damaged

Roof materials Ridge Valleys Eaves Verges Parapet Cornice

Thereafter, the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

7 Notwithstanding the drawings hereby approved:

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

23 In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

10 Existing windows shall be retained and repaired unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to protect the original fabric of the building and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

13 All external doors shall be retained unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to protect the character of the original building.

14 Before the development commences, details, specifications and finishes of all new external doors, including frame section sizes, reveal depths and any mouldings and architraves at a minimum of 1:10 scale shall have been approved in writing by the Local planning Authority. Thereafter, the new doors shall be installed in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

15 The residential accommodation hereby permitted shall not be occupied unless a scheme of sound attenuation works has been installed and thereafter retained. Such scheme of works shall:

a) Be based on the findings of an approved noise survey of the application site, including an approved method statement for the noise survey,

24 b) Be capable of achieving the following noise levels: Bedrooms: LAeq 15 minutes - 30 dB (2300 to 0700 hours) Living Rooms: Laeq 15 minutes - 40 dB (0700 to 2300 hours),

c) Include a system of alternative acoustically treated ventilation to all habitable rooms.

Before the scheme of sound attenuation works is installed full details thereof shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of the amenities of the future occupiers of the building.

16 Before the use of the development is commenced, a Validation Test of the sound attenuation works shall have been carried out and the results submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Such Validation Test shall:

a) Be carried out in accordance with an approved method statement,

b) Demonstrate that the specified noise levels have been achieved. In the event that the specified noise levels have not been achieved, then notwithstanding the sound attenuation works thus far approved, a further scheme of sound attenuation works capable of achieving the specified noise levels and recommended by an acoustic consultant shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before the use of the development is commenced. Such further scheme of works shall be installed as approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the use is commenced and shall thereafter be retained.

In the interests of the amenities of the future occupiers of the building.

17 Before the development is commenced full details of the proposed refuse and recycling storage facilities to be provided to serve the development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include a method statement indicating how the facilities will be managed and serviced and how occupiers of the proposed development will be encouraged to maximise the use of the proposed recycling facilities to reduce general waste arising. Prior to the occupation of the proposed development the approved facilities shall have been implemented in conjunction with the approved method statement and shall thereafter be retained.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality.

18 Before the development is commenced, full details of suitable and sufficient cycle parking accommodation within the site shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and such approved cycle parking accommodation shall be provided and thereafter retained. The development shall only be used without such approved cycle parking

25 accommodation with the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of sustainable travel.

19 The development shall not be used unless the glazed rooflight to the second floor shall have been fitted with suitable double glazing in accordance with details that shall have received the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

In order to ensure that new development makes energy savings in the interests of mitigating the effects of climate change.

20 The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the drawings hereby approved:

Drawing No’s : 07/158-07 Rev B 07/158-04 Rev D 07/158-05 Rev C 07/158-08 Rev B 07/158-09 Rev A 07/158-06 Rev B,

(as may be subsequently revised in compliance with conditions) unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to define the permission.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

1. The decision to grant planning permission and impose any conditions has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in the Sheffield Unitary Development Plan and adopted Core Strategy set out below:

CS27 - Housing in the City Centre CS64 - Climate Change, Resources and Sustainable Design of Developments CS65 - Renewable Energy and Carbon Reduction BE5 - Building Design and Siting BE19 - Development affecting Listed Buildings H5 - Flats, Bed-sitters and Shared Housing H16 - Open Space in New Housing Developments S3 - Development in the Central Shopping Core S10 - Conditions on Development in Shopping Areas

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

26 This informative is intended as a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission. For further detail on the decision please see the application report by contacting the Planning Records section on 2734220 or by visiting Sheffield City Council’s website at www.sheffield.gov.uk/your- city-council/council-meetings/planning-boards

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

2. From the 6th April 2008, the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications and Deemed Applications) Regulations 2008 require that all requests for confirmation of compliance with planning conditions require a fee payable to the Local Planning Authority. An application to the Local Planning Authority will be required using the new national standard application forms. Printable forms can be found at www.sheffield.gov.uk/planning or apply online at www.planningportal.gov.uk. The charge for this type of application is £85 or £25 if it relates to a condition on a householder application for development.

27 Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

These imposing Grade 2 listed buildings are prominently located at the corner of Haymarket and Commercial Street. No 2 Haymarket has 3 storeys, the ground floor being used as a bank with the upper floors vacant, having been last used as offices many years ago.

No’s 5-7 Commercial Street was until 1967 a stock exchange. It is set down by half a storey, and was probably connected with the bank in the 1970’s when the trading floor was taken out and new office floors made. Its ground floor is vacant and belongs to the bank.

Beneath both buildings is a basement occupied by the bank.

The application is to add a second floor to 5-7 Commercial Street, to convert the first floor of 5-7 Commercial Street and the upper 2 floors of 2 Haymarket, all to

28 form 11 self-contained flats. There will be 7 x 1 bedroom flats and 4 x 2 bedroom flats, accessed through the existing double doors to Commercial Street.

HISTORY

App No’s 08/00399/FUL and 08/00402/LBC: Applications by the present applicant for alterations to form 8 flats (revised) were withdrawn on 10 July 2008.

App No’s 08/05878/FUL and 08/0579/LBC: Revised applications by the present applicant for Extension to the roof of 5-7 Commercial Street and alterations to form 11 flats were withdrawn on 29 June 2009.

REPRESENTATIONS

None.

ASSESSMENT

Pre-Application Discussion

In view of the previous withdrawals, numerous discussions including site meetings have taken place and the following issues were made acceptable: Living conditions in the flats notably daylighting; listed building details especially floor levels and routing of services; Flat layouts and access and external design of roof extension to 5-7 Commercial Street.

Land Use

Core Strategy Policy CS27 provides for Housing in the City Centre in the Castlegate Area, with a mix of tenures and sizes of unit.

The site lies within the Central Shopping Area in the Unitary Development Plan. The ground floor to Haymarket lies within the Retail Core. Policy S3 lists Housing as a Preferred use except on ground floor frontages within the Retail Core.

There is no policy objection to housing being provided on this site.

Living Accommodation

Policy H5 requires flat conversions to provide satisfactory living conditions for the occupants of the accommodation and for their immediate neighbours.

As first submitted, Flats 5, 9 10 and 11 lacked adequate amenity, in particular pleasing and convenient balcony access and daylight. These deficiencies have been addressed by complete rearrangement of Flats 9, 10 and 11, and enlarging the window of Flat 5 and re-arranging the interior.

The proposal now provides satisfactory living conditions.

Noise

Policy S10(b) requires that development should not cause residents to suffer from unacceptable living conditions, including air pollution, noise, other nuisance or risk to health and safety.

The submitted Noise Report shows that the main noise source is from road traffic, buses and trams. The site is assessed as falling within Noise Exposure Category C in Planning Policy Guidance 24. Residential occupation is therefore possible with appropriate sound attenuation.

The proposal will have acoustic double glazing and ducted alternative ventilation, subject to further listed building and other details, all secured by conditions.

Design and Listed Building Issues

Policy BE5 requires good design and the use of good quality materials in all refurbished buildings and extensions. All extensions should respect the scale, form, details and materials of the original building.

Policy BE19 requires internal and external alterations affecting the special interest of a listed building to preserve its character or appearance and where appropriate to preserve or repair original details or features of interest.

S10(d) requires development to be well designed and of a scale and nature appropriate to the site.

At first, the applicant was advised that a second floor on the roof of 5-7 Commercial Street could not be accommodated without compromising the character of the listed building, partly because of the design of the initial proposal. In the event, the submitted proposal has been found to be acceptable because of the improved form and proportion, the setting back behind the existing stone parapet and balustrade, and the replication of some of the stone detailing to match the existing building.

The first and second floor rear windows to 2 Haymarket have been much altered in the past, for example to provide a fire escape, which is to be removed. The rear elevation is clearly visible from Commercial Street. It is unsightly at present and needs improvement. Reinstatement of replicated windows has been agreed informally, but has not been shown on the present drawings. This is conditioned.

The internal subdivision of the upper floors to 2 Haymarket is much improved, retaining the two staircases and hall doors unaltered as communal circulation space. The amount of floor needing to be raised to accommodate service runs is reduced to two small areas, and the height of the raised floor is halved (from 400mm to 200mm). Overall there is less conflict, and better presentation of the original interior.

Second floor service runs now go directly to vertical service drops, with no longer a need to be routed through false ceilings to the first floor rooms.

30 In the present scheme there are no longer bathrooms behind main frontage windows. Bathrooms are relocated internally or replanned.

The high ceilings lend the rooms to loft-style bed decks, and full advantage is taken of this.

New partition walls will be of lightweight reversible construction. There will be no suspended ceilings.

The proposals represent a good option for the re-use of otherwise obsolete office accommodation. The detailed fitting of the new elements is controlled by conditions in order to ensure the existing character is not unduly compromised.

Refuse and Recycling

Some bin storage space is shown at entrance level under the main stairs, although this may not be sufficient. No other space is available on site, and in case of greater need some provision off-site nearby may be needed. The bank is understood to use space in a yard across Haymarket. This in itself is not a reason to resist the proposal as any new occupier would be faced with the same problem on site.

A Method Statement is required by condition.

Cycle Storage

There may be room for limited provision at entrance level, and if feasible this is required by condition.

Mobility Housing

Policy H7 requires 25% of flats in all new or refurbished housing to be Mobility Housing, except where physical characteristics or existing buildings make it impracticable.

No Mobility Housing proposals are included in the scheme. Owing to numerous levels changes and other site restrictions this is not considered practicably feasible.

Sustainability

Core Strategy Policy CS64 requires all building conversions to be designed to reduce carbon emissions.

The proposal will reduce water consumption and maximise water recycling; it will use sustainable materials where possible and make the most sustainable use of other materials; and it will minimise waste and promote recycling both during construction and occupation. The building will be double glazed, also for acoustic purposes, and the second floor rooflight will be double glazed to retain heat within the building.

31 This will be sufficient to meet Policy CS64, taking into account the limited opportunities with this difficult building. However the development’s predicted carbon emissions cannot be realistically reduced by 20% as set out in Policy CS65 as the listed building occupies almost all of the site. This is not in itself a reason to resist this proposal.

Open Space Contribution

Policy H16 requires developers to ensure that there would be sufficient open space to meet the local needs of people living there. Appendix 2 of the City Centre Living Strategy sets out the rates for the city centre.

A Unilateral Planning Obligation under Section 106 is required to secure a sum of £11,469.05 in line with these requirements. The money would be allocated in discussion with the Community Assembly.

CONCLUSION

This proposal will allow the upper floors of this important listed building to be brought back into a suitable use after being vacant for many years.

Its appearance from the street will be improved as poor external work is put right and clutter removed. There will be some loss of character internally, but only because of the subdivision of the large rooms. All the work is reversible without undue damage should the need arise.

The proposal is a welcome improvement to a part of the city centre in need of regeneration.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant subject to the recommended conditions and to a Unilateral Planning Obligation under Section 106 with the following Heads of Terms:

(a) A financial contribution of £11,469.05 towards public open space in the vicinity of the site (b) The above sum being increased in line with inflation if the development is delayed for 2 years or more.

Case Number 09/02978/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Application to vary condition 2 of planning application 09/01796/FUL (Use of parking bays for selling food from a mobile catering van) to allow opening from 18:30 to 04:00 (Application Under Section 73)

Location Parking Bay Opposite The Hicks Building (University Of Sheffield) Hounsfield Road Sheffield S3 7RF

Date Received 24/09/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent Mr D Hamroun

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The site shall be used for the above mentioned purpose only between 1830 hours and 0400 hours on any day.

In the interests of ensuring adequate public parking is available and in the interest of traffic and pedestrian safety.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

CF7 - Development in Institution: Education Areas CF8 - Conditions on Development in Institution Areas

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

33 Site Location

INTRODUCTION

Members decided to defer this application at the last meeting, pending an investigation into the use of the space in the day time. Officers have now investigated the matter and found that the day time use is a different operator. It is not sited on a parking space and has been there in excess of 10 years so is immune from enforcement action.

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application site is located at the north end of Hounsfield Road close to Western Bank. It comprises of 5 on street parking bays that are pay and display bays between 8 am and 6.30 pm Monday to Saturday. The site adjoins buildings in education use and also a surface car park.

The applicant was granted planning permission in July of this year to park his catering van on the site between the hours of 6.30 pm and 2am. The applicant had

34 applied to operate the use until 2am on Fridays and Saturdays and until 1am on other days. However as there was considered to be no significant amenity issues, consent was granted to until 2am on all days.

Having operated for a short period of time, the applicant has now decided that he needs open until 4am in order for the business to be viable. Therefore an application has been made to vary the operating hour’s condition on the original permission.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

Planning permission was granted in July 2009 for use of parking bays for selling food from a mobile catering van, planning permission 09/01796/FUL.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Policy Issues

The application site lies in an Institution Education policy area in the Unitary Development Plan, policy CF7. Preferred uses are education uses and other community facilities, food and drink uses are acceptable in this policy area. Policy CF8 states that in institution areas development must not cause residents or visitors to any hotel, hostel, residential institution or housing to suffer from unacceptable living conditions, including air pollution, noise, or other nuisance.

Amenity Issues

There are no residential uses near the site. The adjoining education buildings are also only likely to have low levels of usage when the catering van is on site. Therefore the extended operating hours should not cause noise disturbance or detract from the amenities of adjoining properties due to smells.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

Due to the location of this particular site, it is considered that extending the opening hours to 4am, will not be detrimental the amenities of the area. Therefore it is recommended that planning consent be granted.

Case Number 09/02887/LBC

Application Type Listed Building Consent Application

Proposal Provision of Automatic Ticket Gates, CCTV cameras and improved lighting in station booking hall and Supertram lobby, erection of glazed barriers adjacent to footbridge stairs, provision of ticket vending machines in Supertram lobby, erection of boundary fencing and walling to the west side of platform one

Location Sheffield Midland Station Sheaf Street Sheffield S1 2BP

Date Received 18/09/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent BPR Architects

Recommendation Refuse

For the following reason(s):

1 The barriers either side of the staircase do not provide sufficient width to cater for disabled access, in conjunction with other pedestrian flows. The automatic ticket gates will adversely affect the open character of the stone faced arches. The scheme of works will create additional visual clutter and the proposed cabling works will be visually intrusive. As a result the proposals will have a harmful impact on the station’s special architectural and historic interest which is considered to be contrary to Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’, and Unitary Development Plan Policy BE19. In addition, insufficient information has been submitted to show what other options have been considered, and the Local Planning Authority has no alternative but to conclude that there are other solutions for controlling access to the station that may be less harmful to the character of the listed building and provide adequate disabled access.

36 Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application relates to the Central Railway Station which is listed grade II. It was designed by Charles Trubshaw for the Midland Railway Company and built in 1905.

The applicant, Stagecoach South Western, is seeking listed building consent to erect automatic ticket gates (AGTs) which they state is to improve safety and security at the station and enable East Midland Trains (EMT) to control ticket revenues. The applicant has advised that EMT have an obligation to provide automatic ticket gates under their franchise agreement.

There are three elements to the proposed works.

37 Booking Hall

It is proposed to install 7 standard ticket gates and 2 wider gates within 4 of the 5 arches leading from the booking hall to the stair lobby serving the pedestrian bridge. Fixed glazed barriers are to be installed either side of the stairs, running back from the aches, these are 1.3m high. New CCTV cameras are proposed to provide coverage of passengers who use the waiting hall and ticket gates as well as new lighting over the ticket gates and associated electrical and communications links.

Supertram Entrance

Within the pedestrian bridge at the Supertram end it is proposed to install 3 standard ticket gates and 1 wider gate along with glazed fixed barriers. It is also proposed to install a ticket vending machine and relocate an existing machine.

Platform One

It is proposed to remove timber fencing incorporating a large advertisement hoarding and concrete bollards at the north end of platform 1. These will be replaced with a new stone wall incorporating decorative stone piers and 1.8m high ornamental metal railings. These works are intended to increase security around a yard area used by station staff and outside contractors.

Additional supporting Information

The applicants have stated that:

- The gates will be staffed at all times whilst in operation and will remain open if staff cannot be provided.

- A bridge pass scheme will be introduced to allow non rail users who use the footbridge on a regular basis to pass through the station. They have stated that an application will need to be made by individuals for a pass and the footbridge pass scheme will be advertised in the station before it is introduced.

- Any person in possession of a valid tram ticket will be allowed to cross the bridge.

- Any person with a disability will be able to apply for a pass if they wish to do so but anyone who is clearly vulnerable will not be denied access.

- East Midlands Train Staff will, at their reasonable discretion, allow the use of the footbridge by ad hoc users who do not have a valid pass unless staff believe a user may not make legitimate use of the footbridge or there are operational reasons for not allowing use.

38 SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

Six representations have been received in favour of the scheme. Comments include; improved ticket vending will improve the station experience and the barriers will reduce fare evasion and not impact significantly on the listed building; there are other alternative safe points to cross the railway. The barriers are the best way to stop fare dodging and prevent fare increases to pay for it. Tickets compatible with the barriers could be issued on the tram. Provided staff are available disabled and vulnerable people can have access over the bridge and the wider barriers could be repositioned so that they are located on the lift side.

Objections have been received from the following groups.

Sheffield Conservation Advisory Group considered the scheme at their meeting of 22.9.09 and commented as follows. The Group felt that the permeability of the building and the possibility of unfettered movement into and through it was an essential part of its character. The Group welcomed the refurbishment scheme so far as it would reduce the clutter in the concourse of the listed building, but it considered that the barriers themselves and the associated partition screening would interrupt the flow of movement and adversely impact on the quality of the internal spaces. The Group also considered that the development would impact on other aspects of the listed building, particularly the Refreshment Room for which a refurbishment proposal had been made and which would only be accessible from within the Station or from the Station’s frontage. The Group was further concerned that the closure of the footbridge to the general public would have a negative impact on the viability of the Grade II* listed Park Hill whose restoration was underway. Overall, the proposal would mean that the building was no longer a public building. If, notwithstanding the Group’s reservations about the proposal, the scheme nevertheless went ahead, the Group wished to be convinced that the development could be reversed without damage to the structure of the listed building. While welcoming the use of natural stone for the perimeter wall, the Group recommended that diagonally mounted fencing be used, of the style which had been characteristic of the Midland Railway.

English Heritage has been consulted but they have advised that they do not consider it necessary for them to be notified of the application and consequently they have made no comments.

South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive has commented on the high quality of the restoration work carried out so far and the importance of the accessible route through the station. They question the number of barriers proposed suggesting that the passengers per barrier ratio would be very high. They are concerned about the risk of pedestrian congestion particularly at peak times and that this could put those with mobility and sight difficulties at a particular disadvantage. They argue that this suggests that Sheffield could be unsuitable for barriers because of the constraints of the listed structure. They point out that the accessible gates at the concourse end are away from the lift and therefore this promotes cross flows and the video help point at the Supertram end is away from the accessible gate. They are concerned about the impact of the works on floor surfaces. They have also questioned how travellers arriving from unmanned

39 stations will purchase a ticket. They consider the works and equipment will visually detract from the improvements completed. They question whether the works may be abortive if the necessary power supplies have not been secured and permissions such as Station Change Approval.

The Central Community Assembly has objected on the grounds that the barriers will create access difficulties for those with limited mobility and discourage integrated transport by foot, tram and train. They also consider that the proposals will damage the appearance and character of the building due to their location, size and materials.

The Royal National Institute of Blind People have objected on the grounds that blind and partially sighted people have difficulty using ticket vending machines, there is the potential for accidents when large numbers of people are flowing in both directions in very congested areas, which will be exacerbated by people queuing to use ticket barriers. Transparent barriers can be difficult to see and reduce confidence. It is difficult to find the ticket entry points and the need to ask for assistance will reduce independence. The barriers will result in the loss of a safe route for blind and partially sighted people from Supertram to the town centre and university.

Sheffield Access Liaison Group met to discuss the application and have commented that they are unanimously opposed to the narrowing of the route to the lift which does not meet national standards. The group are also concerned that cross movements to the ticket barriers could cause congestion and confusion. They are also concerned that the glass barriers could cause problems for visually impaired people, the glass could break, Burger King customers could put containers on top of them, and that they generally minimise space for passenger movement. They consider that the station’s listed building status may impact on the ability to use manifestations on the glass. The group were keen that an ‘In’ and ‘out’ flow is established to prevent confusion, congestion and the associated safety issues, especially if disabled people are unable to vacate the area in the event of an emergency.

Sheffield Transport4All have objected on the grounds that ticket gates will restrict circulation resulting in congestion around the lifts, stairs and Supertram lobby which will have a negative impact on people with physical, sensory and cognitive/mental impairments. The planning board should enquire whether an impact assessment has been carried out on this issue.

Sheffield Civic Trust have objected to the application as they consider insufficient information has been submitted to; describe and analyse the character of the spaces affected; to describe the historical development of the spaces; to justify the proposals and assess alternative options, including options which would compensate for severing this important pedestrian link. They consider the footbridge to be a key connection and those without passes will be forced to use an unsafe over-bridge. The barriers will curtail the free flowing use of the spaces. The barriers either side of the stairs will form dead end spaces that will lead to congestion and inconvenience. The space between the foot of the stairs and the barriers is inadequate and will result in a queues backing up on the stairs. Once

40 the barriers are installed the stairs will have to operate on a one-way system which will have a negative impact on the way the building is used and experienced. The proposals will have a damaging impact on the listed building and its setting and the way people currently experience and interpret the building will be lost. The route through the footbridge is the main and safest approach to Park Hill and its closure will have a profound effect on its refurbishment.

The Railway Heritage Trust has commented that there are many examples of the installation of modern access facilities within historic spaces whilst respecting the design of earlier structures. They consider the current proposals fall within this approach. They have no objection to the location of the gates provided sufficient safe distance is maintained between the stairs and the gates. They say that the installation of power and services and CCTV installations needs to be given carefully consideration. They draw attention to the CCTV cable route which is not defined and has the potential to impact on the high level visual environment of the roof structure. They consider the works to the platform 1 compound including the stone wall, railing and revised cable routing is a visual improvement over the existing situation. They comment that the bridge pass system would need to be robust to deal with the number of people seeking a safe route over the railway without compromising the security of the station.

Urban Splash consider the scheme will be inconvenient to existing and future residents, that the link through the station is fundamental to the regeneration of Park Hill and Sheaf Valley Park and that the commercial elements of the Park Hill Scheme were conceived on the basis of the expected footfall via the station footbridge.

The Friends of Sheaf Valley Park have objected as they consider the proposals will put at risk the regeneration of the park and area and impact on the interconnectedness of the footpath links.

Sheffield City College objects to the scheme on the grounds that the city has invested money in the station to create a pleasant, safe route from the tram stop/Sheffield College at the rear to the University and other public transport on the Sheaf Street side.

The Residents Against Station Closure have objected on the grounds that the works will detract from the character of the building and the space and circulation within the building, especially the concourse area. This will affect the everyday use and appreciation of the building. There are factual errors in the application submission. One of these is that they are not obliged to install ATGs under the franchise agreement. The franchise document allows them to operate staffed barriers during the peak or provide additional revenue protection on trains. The consultation carried out by the applicant is not meaningful, all the groups and organisations consulted have overwhelmingly rejected the proposals. The applicants have not provided any evidence to justify the effect of the proposals on revenue protection. They will not improve the safety/security of passengers as Sheffield station is already safe with low levels of crime, trouble and vandalism. This is in contrast with the route that many passengers would be forced to use. Passenger surveys have found that views on safety and security have consistently

41 out performed the responses from other similar stations. Many objectors have indicated that the open busy station contributes to the feelings of personal safety at the station. The barriers make safety worse during special events as they will have to be left open for safety reasons. The proposals will worsen the situation for disabled people by reducing circulation space particularly for the route to the lift and creating cross movement conflicts between the lift and the wider accessible ticket gates. Experience has shown that EMT staff are not sensitive to the needs of disabled people and the barriers do not effectively and speedily accommodate disabled people. The barriers will cause even greater problems for other vulnerable groups and those with multiple disabilities. The footbridge and station improvements were publicly funded and provide great benefits to the city as a whole. The public interest should not be sacrificed for a narrow commercial interest.

Sheffield Law Centre has objected, drawing attention to disability discrimination and equality discrimination legislation that they consider has a bearing on this application. They argue that the needs of people with hearing, sight or speech impairments, learning disabilities, dyslexia, autism or mental health problems and those with multiple disabilities have not been addressed in the proposal. Having to request assistance to negotiate the barriers takes away the independence of disabled people and is demeaning. It is also unreasonable for people to discuss their disability in public or for staff to make sensitive decisions in a public environment. It is not clear what provision will be made for people who require carers, friends, family to assist them whilst not travelling. The safe route through the station is likely to be particularly important for women and therefore the Council must consider the Gender Equality Duty. They consider the gap between the barriers and the lift is too narrow and that siting the wider barriers in the central arch will mean lift users having to cross flows of travellers using the stairs which could cause safety risks. Disabled people approaching from the Supertram entrance who need to use the ticket office will not be able to do so which means a second class service will be provided for disabled people.

1244 objections have been received. This includes the objections from the groups listed above and below and from the following MPs, Betts, Blunkett, Caborne, Clegg, Munn and Smith, and also councillors, Auckland, Armstrong, Ayris, Bramall, Clement-Jones, Creasy, Drayton, Dunkley, Furniss, Harpham, Harston, Iqbal, Little, Midgley, Mirfin-Boukouris, Pye, Rosling-Josephs, Satur, Scriven, Shaffaq, Sidebottom, Wilson. The following groups also objected, Sheffield Pensioners Action Group, The Victoria Environment Group, the Manor and Castle Development Trust, Victoria Community Enterprise, Huddersfield, Penistone and Sheffield Rail Users’ Association, Grace Owen Nursery, Sheffield Friends of the Earth.

A petition listing the names and address of 23 individuals who consider that the footbridge should remain open to the public has been received. As there are no signatures, this should be treated with caution.

The main grounds of objection are:

42 Restrictions on access.

The station should be a public building allowing access for all.

The footbridge is an important pedestrian link, not just for rail users. It is an important link for local communities to access facilities in the city centre. The barriers will sever walking links between Park Hill/Norfolk Park and the city centre, and the public space either side of the station forcing residents, workers, staff and students of City College, and vulnerable people, to make use of an unsafe and unattractive footbridge or make long detours. The alternative routes are considered to be particularly unsuitable for women, disabled and elderly people. This will increase journey length, create a safety problem and be inconvenient. It will lead to residents of these areas feeling cut off and excluded.

The barriers will harm the integration of the public transport system, limit access to the tram stop, not all travellers buy tram tickets in advance. It will cut the link between the tram stop, bus/ train stations, the City Centre, University and CIQ which the tram stop is intended to serve.

The barriers are unsustainable and will encourage increased car usage, pollution and worsen climate change.

The barriers infringe human rights to use the bridge to access the city centre.

The bridge pass scheme is unworkable and insufficient details are provided on how it will operate. It is also unsatisfactory that those without a pass will rely on the discretion of EMT staff as to whether they will be able to use the footbridge. People may have underlying health conditions that may not be obvious and it is demeaning if they have to reveal these in order to pass over the bridge. There have already been examples of staff restricting access across the bridge for disabled people, this suggests that we should not have confidence with the guarantee that vulnerable people will be allowed safe passage.

Casual users will be restricted from accessing the footbridge.

The barriers will cause delays in boarding trains, cause passengers to miss trains and be inconvenient.

The barriers will deny access to rail customers as the full range of tickets will not be available through the ticket machines at the Supertram end of the bridge, which will compromise the use of the station.

The barriers will mean that family and friends cannot be seen off or be assisted when departing/arriving by train, and will prevent train spotters accessing the platforms.

EMT should provide a replacement footbridge of equal equality to the one they are restricting access across.

43 The restrictions on access are contrary to regeneration masterplans, economic policy, planning policy and regional planning policy which seek improved accessibility and connectivity and promote integrated transport systems. The access restrictions are also contrary to Core Strategy Policies, CS45, CS48 (both or which are concerned with providing access to open space), CS51, CS53, CS54, CS61, CS63 (these are concerned with providing access to transport facilities and promoting pedestrian access.

The barriers will impede movement and be a particular problem for disabled people, people with luggage and bicycles.

Access for disabled and vulnerable people.

The footbridge is the only suitable link for disabled people, people with mobility difficulties, elderly people, and people with pushchairs from Park Hill to the City Centre. There is a legal right for disabled people to use the bridge.

The tram link is used by visually impaired customers to access the station as it is safer than other forms of public transport. The scheme does not give sufficient consideration to the needs of these people as they cannot use ticket vending machines. Other groups such as those with learning difficulties, Dyslexia and some elderly people may be similarly affected.

The proposals will prevent disabled people using the station independently which will be demeaning.

The Council need to assess whether the proposals comply with the Disability Discrimination Act.

There appears to be no manifestation shown on the glazed barriers and it would be difficult to achieve a design that is appropriate for a listed building. There is a lack of way finding signs, especially for disabled people.

The accessible barriers are located centrally and therefore to reach these from the lift it will be necessary to cross the flow of other users which will be dangerous at busy times.

The gap between the glass barriers and the staircase on the lift side is not wide enough and does not meet recommended minimum widths.

Safety

The barriers will force the public to use an unsafe footbridge to access the City Centre from the tram stop.

Passenger safety is not an issue at the Station and therefore part of the applicant’s justification for the barriers is undermined.

Speed of evacuation will be reduced during an emergency.

44 Capacity/Convenience/congestion.

Insufficient barriers are proposed to cope with the demand and queuing space is inadequate, this will create a safety hazard, particularly when major events are held.

The barriers will be inconvenient and add to congestion, particularly when breakdowns occur and staffing levels are reduced.

They will cause delays for people who cannot pass through the standard barriers e.g. cyclists and people with pushchairs.

Impact on the Character of Listed building.

The barriers are unsightly and will not be in keeping with the architecture, they will break up the open character and floorscape and restrict access that is necessary to appreciate the building.

The size, location and materials of the barriers will detract from the character of the listed building.

The ability to move around spaces freely is an important part of the character of the station which will be harmed by the barriers.

The proposals will affect the functionality of the ticket hall.

The proposals will affect the setting and detract from the preservation of Park Hill and Norfolk Park conservation area by reducing the scope for their retention in economic use.

The barriers interfere with the open aspect of the arches and clutter the arches. The glass barriers will create clutter and the barrier at the southern archway is particularly incongruous as it is aligned along the central axis of the archway.

CCTV cameras and cabling will harm the historical integrity of the station and cause damage to the stonework.

The wall and fence on platform 1 will spoil the character of the listed building.

Commercial Issues.

The commercial interests of the train operator are being placed above the public interest. They should not be able to remove public access given the public money used to fund the integrated tram link.

Alternative means of protecting revenue should be considered such as locating the barriers on the platforms and increasing ticket collectors on the trains, opening one of the other bridges for public access.

45 The proposal will impact on business in the station located behind the barriers, as they will have their custom restricted.

The proposals are designed to allow the train operator to reduce costs and staffing.

The franchise agreement allows for alternative means of revenue protection other than barriers. No analysis has been done to demonstrate the impact of the barriers on revenue protection.

The barriers will impact on businesses by reducing access for customers through the station.

Other Issues

The proposals will prejudice the regeneration of Park Hill and the benefits of creating the Sheaf Valley Park, as access will be restricted by the barriers.

The applicant should have demonstrated that alternative barrier positions are not viable and that this is the only option.

Some of the objectors said they did not object to CCTV cameras, lighting, ticket vending machines and the video help point.

People living locally will not be able to access the shops, cash machines, in the station which provide essential local services.

What arrangements are being made for bike users?

Barriers give a poor impression of the city to visitors.

Ticket machines do not prevent fare dodging and only accept exact amounts of cash.

The works are not permitted development and require planning permission as well as Listed Building consent.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Policy Issues

It is a statutory requirement of the Local Planning Authority under section 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to “have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any feature of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.” Members should be aware that these are the issues they need to focus on in determining an application for listed building consent and other issues, such as station management issues, and pedestrian connections through the station are not relevant to determining this application, no matter how important they are in the wider sense.

46 Planning Policy Guidance Note ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’ (PPG15) states that applicants must be able to justify their proposals; they will need to show why works that affect the character of a listed building are desirable or necessary. In order to do this it is necessary to have a good understanding of what makes the building special, and if the proposals are harmful to this special character, the alternative options that have been considered. In this case the applicant’s Design and Access Statement does not demonstrate that they have carefully considered the impact of the proposals on the listed building and considered other alternatives to those proposed.

The application is for listed building consent. Policy BE19 of the Unitary Development Plan states that proposals for internal or external alterations which would affect the special interest of a Listed Building will be expected to preserve the character and appearance of the building and where appropriate, to preserve or repair original details and features of interest.

Impact on the Character of the Listed Building

Works at the Supertram End of the Pedestrian Bridge

The barriers located at the Supertram end of the pedestrian footbridge are within the modern pedestrian bridge, which was granted permission in August 2000, application 00/00885/LBC. Given that this is a modern structure with a stainless steel interior it cannot be argued that the automatic ticket machines, barriers and associated lighting and CCTV cameras will have an effect on the architectural or historic character of the listed building. Therefore the works at the Supertram end of the bridge do not require listed building consent and are permitted development for railway undertakers; consequently they are outside of the control of the Local Planning Authority.

Booking Hall Automatic Ticket Gates

The automatic ticket gates are located within or adjoining 4 out of the five arches that connect the booking hall to the stair lobby serving the pedestrian foot bridge. They are constructed of stainless steel and clear glass and have grey plastic opening gates. Their overall height is 1.3m and they will be fixed into the floor rather than the arches.

The arches are an important feature of the listed station, and the list description identifies 39 arched openings, (there are actually 46 arches) within the design of the station. The arches are built of stone with voussoirs and keystones – the central arch of the five affected by this application has a Midland Railway Co. crest. Although some of the arches have been altered by the addition of glazing, they still retain the open character and enable views in and out of the station. The arches are prominent features throughout the entrance concourse to the station, helping to reinforce a sense of arrival.

Whilst the automatic ticket gates are contemporary features that could be viewed as modern interventions within the historic station buildings, similar to the new retail units, the ticket office and the train information sign, these gates are

47 considered to detrimentally affect the open character of the listed station, by interrupting and forming a barrier within the open arches of the station. PPG 15, paragraph 3.12 states that the special interest of a building “may comprise ….the spaces and layout of the building” and the applicants have failed to show that the impact on the open character is justified by demonstrating that there are no other viable and feasible options for controlling access to the station, which have a less harmful impact on the character of the listed building.

The new gates and associated barriers are faced in similar materials or use similar colours to the other new structures within the station booking hall, and consequently they will not appear out of place in that sense.

The gates will clearly form a barrier to pedestrian movement and a visual obstruction within the open arches. However they are fairly low level modern interventions that will not dominate or overwhelm the more solid and massive stone/brick arches. Originally it was proposed to remove a number of modern additions that are fixed directly to the stone arches on the booking hall side such as telephones and information signs. The latest drawings show that these elements will largely remain unaltered, with the newspaper stands relocated to the entrance elevation of the concourse.

The proposal responds to the symmetry of the arches by providing the wider gates in the main central arch with a set of 3 narrower gates in the two arches either side. It is not entirely symmetrical as one of the outer two arches contains only one gate whilst the other is open. However because the gates are low level modern, light weight interventions this is not considered to be critical.

As the gates are positioned within or closely adjoining the arches they do not disrupt the feeling of space within the booking hall. They do however add to the clutter of modern elements within the important stone facade that separates the booking hall from the stair lobby. One of the key objectives of the station improvements was creating more generous spaces and reducing the clutter, in order to improve the character and setting of the listed building. The arches are much less impressive from the footbridge stair lobby side as they comprise of painted brickwork. It is felt that that from this viewpoint the low level modern barriers will not have a significant impact on the special character of the listed station, although as stated above, the loss of the openness of the arches will have an affect on the spaces and character of the station concourse.

Glazed Barriers with the pedestrian footbridge stair lobby.

Glazed barriers 1.3m high are proposed either side of the stairs running between the booking hall arches towards platform 1. Their purpose is to maintain free access to the retail units, photo booth and left luggage office, whilst ensuring access to the footbridge, lift and platform 1 is only available by ticket or pass.

The footbridge stair lobby is a smaller less impressive space than the main booking hall. It is a space that the public pass through rather than where they wait or linger. The retail units and staircase which dominate the space are of no architectural or historic interest. It is the high vaulted ceiling which is of special interest.

The glazed barriers are low level lightweight features. They are below eye level and will for the most part be see through. As a result they will not from significant visual obstructions.

They are clearly contemporary features which are constructed of a modern high quality material and they will not be confused with the historic structure. They will be largely fixed to the modern tiled floor with minimal fixings to the historic structure.

The barriers will clearly restrict pedestrian movement within the stair lobby, which is likely to make the space feel more congested and less comfortable for passengers. The barriers will also add to the structures in this fairly limited space. However it is the ceiling that provides the special interest in this part of the building and the low level barriers will not harm this feature. Given this, the minimal visual impact of the barriers and the context of the large modern staircase, relatively poor quality shop frontages and plethora of signs and information panels, it is considered that there is insufficient justification for resisting these features on listed building grounds.

Lighting, CCTV cameras and service cables

3 CCTV cameras directed towards the automatic ticket gates are proposed within the booking hall. They will be fixed to the steel roof trusses along with the associated cables. Cables will also be fixed to the stonework façade facing on to the booking hall with one cable attached to the front of the carved stonework forming part of the central arch. Four similar cameras are proposed in the footbridge stair lobby with cables either fixed within or on top of existing plastic trunking that runs along the top edge of an ornate cornice below the vaulted ceiling. Cable connections will be required back to the CCTV communications room located adjacent to platform 1.

Improved lighting is proposed within the 3 main arches above the ticket barriers. This would be installed on lighting tracks fixed below the decorative wrought iron grills with the cable runs clipped across the stone façade facing onto the booking hall.

The proposed cabling to serve the lighting and CCTV installations is considered to be insensitive to the special character of the listed building. It has been routed across the important stone façade facing on to the booking hall and tacked on to existing insensitive cabling works within the staircase lobby. It is considered that these works will add to the modern clutter within the booking hall and stair lobby and detract from the special character of the listed building. There are other solutions that could be adopted, such as re-routing the cables to minimise the impact on the stone facades and improving and tidying up the existing cable runs within the stair lobby. The CCTV cameras will also add a small amount of additional modern clutter to the attractive ceilingscape within the booking hall and stair lobby.

Platform 1 wall and fencing

The proposals for platform 1 are intended to provide a more secure boundary treatment to a yard area located at the northern end of the platform. Existing timber fence panels and a large hoarding that extend up to the edge of a decorative timber edged canopy structure, along with a series of low concrete bollards running along the back edge of the platform, will be removed. These will be replaced with a natural stone wall with piers 2.6m high and a black vertical bar railing fence 1.8m high. The stone will match the type, colour, finish and bond of adjacent stone walls with matching mortar and decorative copings are proposed for the wall and piers. The proposals are a significant improvement on the existing boundary treatment to the yard area. They will therefore enhance the setting of the listed building. Further discussions could take place over the railing design to see if the applicants could be convinced to adopt a more traditional design associated with the Midland Railway, as suggested by the Conservation Advisory Group.

Summary of the Listed Building Issues

The works to platform 1 will clearly enhance the character and setting of the listed building and should be welcomed. The automatic ticket gates and the lighting, CCTV cameras, and associated cabling will add to the visual clutter of modern additions and detract from the character and setting of the listed building. The automatic ticket gates will also adversely affect the open character of the station by forming a barrier within the open arches It is considered that this additional clutter should not be accepted in the absence of a scheme to reduce unnecessary clutter such as, advertisements, information signs, and tidy up existing insensitive cabling works. It is also considered that the impact on the open character of the station should not be accepted in the absence of clear evidence that this is the only feasible and viable option and that it will have the least impact on the character of the listed building. Finally it is also considered that the insensitive cabling works to serve the new lighting and CCTV cameras will have an unacceptable impact on the character of the listed building.

It is considered that there are options which could partially overcome the concerns with respect to the additional clutter created by the proposals. There are a plethora of signs, information boards and unsympathetic cabling works within the booking hall and stair lobby. A scheme of improvements to reduce the existing clutter and tidy up cabling would go some way to compensate for the new features proposed as part of the application. It may be that less harmful cabling could be achieved if a more sensitive approach was taken, but this has not been demonstrated. This might involve routing the lighting services under the floor and within new timber frames in the reveals to the arches; routing the CCTV cables in the booking hall along the roof structure rather than across the face of the stonework; constructing more sensitively designed cable trunking along the top of the cornice in the stair lobby and tidying up the existing cables.

Disabled Access Issues

Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’ provides local planning authorities guidance on dealing with listed building issues.

50 Paragraph 3.28 states “It is important in principle that disabled people should have dignified easy access to and within historic buildings. If it is treated as part of an integrated review of access requirements for all visitors or users, and a flexible and pragmatic approach is taken, it should normally be possible to plan suitable access for disabled people without compromising a building’s special interest. Alternative routes or re-organising the use of spaces may achieve the desired result without the need for damaging alterations.”

Circular 01/06 ‘Guidance on Changes to the Development Control System’, provides advice on use of Design and Access Statements. It states that the access statement should be clear how the approach to access has balanced the duties imposed by the Disability Discrimination Act, where the proposal is subject to those. It also says that where inclusive design has not been possible an explanation as to why should be given.

Within buildings used by the public, Unitary Development Plan Policy BE7 seeks to encourage safe and easy access for disabled people and people with children.

Automatic ticket gates inevitability make disabled access less easy as they are a barrier to movement, create queues and some groups would have to rely on staff assistance to negotiate the ticket gates. However this is not considered to be sufficient reason to oppose the barriers in principle. The applicant argues that the ATGs are in full compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and DfT Accessible Train and Station Design for Disabled People – A Code of Practice July 2008. Ticket barriers are also an accepted installation at many stations throughout the country and the design of the ticket gates and ticket machines have evolved through consultations with disabled user groups. They are operational at a large number of other National Rail stations and on the London Underground. The train operators are allowed to provide such facilities without planning permission, it is only because Sheffield Station is listed that the facilities at the booking hall end of the bridge require listed building consent.

Given the above, members are advised to focus on the detailed application and layout of the ticket machines and associated barriers and the impact that this has on disabled access to facilities and movement rather than whether they should be provided at all.

The wider automatic ticket machine barriers provide a clear opening width of 1080mm. They have been used in various stations throughout the country and are considered to allow for access by wheelchair and many mobility impaired users. They do not meet the needs of all users, such as blind people and people with learning difficulties and in certain circumstance people with wheelchairs may require assistance. However the barriers will always be staffed and therefore assistance can be provided if required. The wider gates are intended to be used by anyone unable to use the narrower gates due to a disability, with a large item of luggage, a pram or buggy, being accompanied by young children or a dog, in possession of an incompatible ticket, plus people requiring assistance. They can be opened by a ticket and can be released by staff using a key or pass.

51 Given that automatic ticket gates are accepted installations at stations, the main concerns relate to, the positioning of the glass barriers adjacent to the footbridge, and whether congestion at the bottom of the stairs will make it difficult for people using the lift to access the wider barriers located in the central arch.

The glass barriers in the footbridge stair lobby reduce the circulation space leading to the lift to 1.4m over a distance of 3m and reduce the circulation space leading to the left luggage office and photo booth to 1.9m over a distance of 7m. Access to the lift is particularly important as it is the lift that makes the station accessible and is the only way for mobility impaired people and those encumbered with luggage and buggies etc to get access to most of the platforms and the Supertram stop.

The minimum width for a two-way corridor is 2m according to Department of Transport guidance “Inclusive Mobility – A Guide to Best Practice on Access to Pedestrian and Transport Infrastructure. Inclusive Mobility’s guidance states that a person being assisted needs 1.2m and a wheelchair user with ambulant person side by side need a clear width of 1.5m. This would suggest a 3m wide two-way route would be desirable where achievable. The 1.4m and 1.9 widths proposed are clearly substandard. They do not allow for two way flows when a disabled person is being assisted by a carer and other passengers are passing in the opposite direction. This is particularly important given that many passengers in the station are carrying large bags, which makes it all the more important that the route to the lift is generous, rather than substandard. The access statement does not explain why the narrow route through to the lift and left luggage office are considered to be acceptable.

Adjusting the position of the barriers to give a minimum 2m clearance through to the lift would leave 3.2m between the barriers and the retail units on the lift side and reduce the space in front of the cash machines below the acceptable level. Inclusive Mobility states that there should be a minimum width of 3.5m to 4.5m by shops. However it should be recognised that many public footpaths outside shops are only 2m wide.

There are also concerns that because the wide gates are positioned in the central arch that congestion around the bottom of the stairs will make it difficult for passengers to make the cross movements from the lift to these wider gates. The applicants claim that their computer modelling, (see response to representations section below) shows that cross movements will not be a problem. Whilst officers still have reservations on this matter it is considered that there is insufficient evidence to challenge the applicant’s assertion.

In this case it may be possible to remove the glass barriers altogether and install ticket barriers across all the five arches, restricting access to all the facilities in the stair lobby. This would remove the pinch points on the route through to the lift and the left luggage office. It would also allow more ticket gates to be provided and potentially allow wider auxiliary gates to be sited within the arch opposite the lift. However this would not overcome the impact on openness and visual clutter as discussed above.

52 RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS

Many of the representations focus on the impact of the barriers on the public passing through the station to access different parts of the city or public transport, and the implications for individuals and vulnerable people in terms of safety and convenience. Numerous of the objections relate to operational issues such as how the bridge pass will work, difficulties with obtaining tickets, delays and inconvenience for travellers, access to shops and station facilities, the impact on businesses within the station and alternative methods of protecting revenue. Whilst these are very important issues, they are not within the remit of this listed building application. The railway station and footbridge is private property and the Local Planning Authority does not have control over access through the station or how the train operator manages and operates its business. The train operator has been advised to review its proposals in the light of the representations and strong public opposition but this is not something that is within the control of the Local Planning Authority.

A number of representations are concerned with whether there are sufficient barriers and sufficient queuing space to cope with the expected number of users and the potential impact on safety. These are matters for the train operator and do not fall within the remit of the Local Planning Authority when determining this Listed Building Application. However, given the concerns raised by members of the public, and in order to give members some reassurance on these matters, the applicants have been asked to clarify whether these issues have been properly considered.

The applicant has advised that safety is their prime consideration. They have a statutory responsibility to demonstrate compliance with the Railway Group Standards that specifically cover the installation and operation of automatic ticket barrier gates as issued by the UK rail industry safety body. They operate a Safety Management System for the franchise as a whole and have experience of gate line operation at Leicester, Lincoln, Loughborough, Derby, London St. Pancras and Nottingham. They are also required to carry out safety verification under the Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006.

In order to determine the number of gates required, passenger flow counts are undertaken in accordance with the Railway Group Standard for both encumbered and unencumbered passengers on typical busy days. The data is uplifted to take into account forecast growth, and gate throughput figures are used in accordance with the relevant standards. Computer aided modelling is then used to assess pedestrian flows through the station. The analysis assesses passenger density levels, queuing, run off to the staircases and potential cross flows. Normal operation, worst case scenario and emergency evacuation are assessed.

The applicant has advised that the results of this assessment show that in normal operation the gates will readily handle passenger flow with spare capacity. During peak times, the highest utilisation in any one five minute period on the main concourse would be 44% during the morning peak and 67% in the afternoon peak. For the Supertram entrance the figures are 38% for the morning peak and 36% for the evening peak. In evacuation conditions, the constraint is the width of the stairs

53 leading to the platforms rather than the number of gates installed. The analysis includes an allowance based on established statistics for passengers with incompatible or corrupted tickets who would be unable to gain access without staff assistance.

The applicant also completed a Hazard Identification Study to take into account that ATGs may alter passenger behaviour. This is attended by staff that have a detailed understanding of the operation of the station.

The applicants have confirmed that the number and type of gates are sufficient to readily cope with the current and forecast passenger flows through the station; that cross flows of passengers from the lift to the wider ticket gates will not be a problem; that the queuing space at the bottom of the stairs and at the Supertram end is sufficient; that the space to accommodate pedestrian flows between the stairs and the glass barriers is sufficient and there will be no impact on the safe evacuation of the station as a result of the introduction of the ticket gates. The applicant has explained that in the event of a safety incident all the gates can be opened in a single action. They will be linked to the fire alarm system and there is an emergency release on activation. The gates will open automatically in the event of a power failure, they can also be opened by staff, and have a back off feature if the paddle closes or opens against an obstruction.

The applicants argue that experience has shown that there is a positive correlation with the introduction of ticket barriers and a reduction in crime and disruptive behaviour at stations. This is as a result of limiting access via the gate barrier only, the increased staff presence, improved CCTV and keeping fare evaders out of the station environment. For these reasons they argue that safety and security at the station is expected to be improved and not diminished.

The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order defines certain types of development that do not require planning permission. It gives railway undertakers the right to carry out development on their operational land, required in connection with the movement of traffic by rail, subject to certain limitations. In addition, works within a building do not normally require permission, unless it is a listed building. The ticket barriers are all within the building and therefore do not require planning permission. The proposed works only require listed building consent where it can be argued that they affect the special architectural or historic character of the listed building.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The application being considered is for listed building consent and members should focus on the impact of the proposals on the special architectural and historic character of the building and the impact of the layout of the barriers on disabled access.

The wider issues concerning general public access through the building, convenience, safety and the quality of service to the public, whilst very important in their own right are outside of the scope of this application.

54 Taking this into account it is concluded that the scheme does not provide adequate access for disabled people and would have a harmful impact on the building’s special architectural and historic interest as explained above. This is considered to be contrary to Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’ and Policy BE19 of the Unitary Development Plan. The application also fails to demonstrate that alternative options have been considered that would have a less damaging impact on the character and the listed building and access within it. It is therefore recommended that listed building consent be refused for these reasons.

Case Number 09/02815/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Application to allow use of lights from 0900 to 2130 (Variation of condition No. 5 of planning permission 02/00299/FUL)

Location Beauchief Tennis Club 35 Cockshutt Avenue Sheffield S8 7DU

Date Received 04/09/2009

Team SOUTH

Applicant/Agent Mr B Burke

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

5 The lighting shall be used only between 0900 hours and 2130 hours at all times and such lights shall not be switched on other than between these times.

In the interests of the amenities of occupiers of adjoining property.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

GE4 - Development and the Green Belt Environment LR10 - Improving Open Spaces H14 - Conditions on Development in Housing Areas

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

56 Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. The applicant is advised that as the proposal is an amendment to condition 5 originally approved in application reference number 02/00299/FUL, all other conditions in that approval remain relevant to the development on the site.

Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application relates to a tennis club, accessed from Cockshutt Avenue, and occupying an area bordered predominantly by residential properties. The site is bounded to the north, south and east by the rear gardens of properties fronting Wingerworth Avenue, Cockshutt Avenue and Old Park Road and to the west by open fields. The site is allocated as Green Belt in the Unitary Development Plan.

57 The great majority of the site area is taken by the seven full sized tennis courts. Only courts 4 & 5 in the south west corner of the site benefit from artificial lighting. The balance of the site is occupied by a hardstanding area for parking and a changing room/clubhouse in the south east corner of the site.

The courts lie at a level substantially lower level (approximately 3.5 -4.5 metres) than the properties on Old Park Road but properties on Cockshutt Avenue and Wingerworth Avenue do not benefit from the same degree of elevation.

Boundary treatments to the site vary greatly along its length but there is a substantial bank of trees and shrubs on the boundary with houses fronting Old Park Road.

The proposal as originally submitted sought to vary the conditioned hours of use of the floodlights, allowing use until 22:30 in the evening. In the light of concerns raised by Officers the Applicant has agreed to modify the proposal to limit use to 21:30, equating to an addition of half an hour each evening.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

Permission for the floodlights was granted by Area Board in 2002 (02/00299/FUL).

The permission contained Condition 5 which stated:

5 The lighting shall be used only between 0900 hours and 2100 hours at all times and such lights shall not be switched on other than between these times.

In the interests of the amenities of occupiers of adjoining property.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

There have been 7 representations regarding the scheme, including 4 objections and 3 letters of support, one of which is a response to points raised by objectors from the Applicant.

Summary of points of objection

The proposal would result in:

- Increased duration of noise nuisance. - Increase in light pollution - Lights having adverse impact on wildlife.

Other matters

- There is bad language being used by players and littering to back gardens. - Light pollution mitigation measures required by the 2002 permission have not been implemented.

58 - Members should alternatively use other local courts at Graves Park for extended playing hours.

Summary of points in support

Lighting of the courts increases surveillance and presence on the courts which deters gatherings of youths and reduces incidents of anti-social behaviour.

The Applicant writes that, to their knowledge, there have been no complaints to the Tennis Club Committee since the lights were installed with regard to light pollution or noise disturbance relating to activities of club members.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

It is considered that there are two key planning issues with regard to the proposal:

1. The impact on the Green Belt 2. The impact on neighbouring amenity

Green Belt considerations

The site lies within Green Belt as defined in the Sheffield Unitary Development Plan. The most relevant policy in this respect is:

GE4 ‘Development and The Green Belt Environment’ states: The scale and character of any development which is permitted in the Green Belt, or would be conspicuous from it, should be in keeping with the area and, wherever possible, conserve and enhance the landscape and natural environment.

It is not considered that the extension of operation of lights for an additional half an hour each evening would represent a significant impact on the character of the Green Belt. The lights would obviously be visible within the Green Belt but the isolux diagram clearly indicates that light spillage around the lit courts is minimal. Such minimal spillage is not felt to represent a substantial urbanisation of the site above and beyond that already in existence.

Use of sporting and leisure spaces

The increased use of the courts also requires consideration of Policy LR10 ‘Improving Open Spaces’. This states that appropriate improvements will be made to public open space which would provide a wider range of outdoor recreation opportunities (including children’s playgrounds and sports facilities) in suitable areas.

The addition of further playing and coaching time would provide a marginal extension of recreation opportunities and this would be welcomed with regard to Policy LR10.

59 Residential Amenity Issues

Lighting

The existing luminaries have been designed so as to prevent excessive light spill and glare. From the information provided with the original application (lux contour plan for lighting) Environmental Protection Officers concluded that the proposed lighting would not have an adverse impact upon occupiers of neighbouring property. The lighting scheme satisfies the requirements of the Institute of Lighting Engineers guidance for the reduction of light pollution.

Intensification of use

This is considered the principle area of concern with regard to the proposal to vary the hours of operation.

During the summer months play on all courts would be possible until perhaps 21:30. Currently play is more limited in the winter. The variation in the condition would enable a more extensive use of the two courts in question up until 21:30 hours during the winter months.

The application initially sought to extend the hours of operation until 22:30 but it was felt that this would extend play well beyond that time currently available through natural lighting in the summer months. The period of operation of the courts would therefore extend significantly into a period that currently offers respite to neighbouring properties at other times of the year. Further, it is likely that the operation this far into the night, with its associate noise from comings and goings would be more intrusive by virtue of the generally quietening of ambient noise levels later into the evening.

The Applicant has therefore agreed to alter the request for variation such that the use would only extend up to 21:30 on any given day.

In considering this revised time limitation it remains a concern that that the location of the courts in a relatively quiet suburban setting means that ambient noise levels in the vicinity are likely to be low and therefore sounds from the courts will still naturally be more discernable.

However, the Councils Environmental Protection Service have confirmed that they have not received any complaints with regard to the use up to 21:30 in the summer months, a time when people are also more likely to be outside enjoying the amenity offered by back gardens, and it is felt that a similar operational time limit in the winter is acceptable.

Hence subject to the newly conditioned curfew it is not felt that the additional disturbance caused by continuation of play until 21:30 on two courts during the winter months represents sufficient grounds for refusal of the variation.

60 Other matters

One objector has raised the subject of the use of foul language on court during matches. Whilst sympathising with residents with regard to inconsiderate behaviour this matter is not a planning consideration.

It is not felt that the matter of debris found in gardens is easy to assess in planning terms since the source of such ‘litter’ is not necessarily or easily attributable to the tennis club itself. It is not considered that a single mention of this factor warrants a requirement to provide an external litterbin on the premises.

The Club Secretary has responded to the claims that an alternative venue should be sought for later games by indicating that such an arrangement would require hiring courts for the entirety of matches which would incur significant extra costs. In addition, such a change of venue would greatly constrain potential coaching sessions for young children.

RECOMMENDATION

It is considered that the proposed development accords with UDP Policies GE4, LR10 and H14 and so it is recommended that the variation be granted.

Case Number 09/02802/CHU

Application Type Planning Application for Change of Use

Proposal Change of use of part of premises to sweet selection area to be used in conjunction with restaurant and function rooms (amendment to application no. 09/00164/FUL) (amended description)

Location 286 Attercliffe Road Sheffield S4 7WZ

Date Received 03/09/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent Messrs J K And W Akhtar And M Zaheer

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act.

2 Before development commences, details shall be submitted to and approved in writing of the colour of the cladding of the building as well as further details (colour and material) of the proposed canopies. The development shall not be used unless such approved details have been implemented.

In the interests of the visual amenities of the locality.

3 The building shall be used for the restaurant purpose hereby approved only between 1100 hours and 2400 hours any day of the week and as function rooms only between 1700 hours and 2400 hours Mondays to Fridays and between 0900 hours and 2400 hours Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

4 No live music or amplified sound shall be played within the building unless a scheme of sound attenuation works has been installed and thereafter retained. Such scheme of works shall:

a) Be based on the findings of an approved noise survey of the application site, including an approved method statement for the noise survey, b) Be capable of restricting noise breakout from the building to the street to levels not exceeding: (i) the background noise levels by more than 3 dB(A) when measured as a 15 minute Laeq, (ii) any octave band centre frequency by more than 3 Db when measured as a 15 minute linear Leq.

Before such scheme of works is installed full details thereof shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

5 No amplified sound shall be played within the building except through an in- house amplified sound system fitted with a sound limiter, the settings of which shall have received the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

6 Before the development is commenced; details of the proposed surfacing, layout and marking out of the car parking accommodation shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The building shall not be used unless the car parking accommodation has been provided in accordance with the approved plans and thereafter such car parking accommodation shall be retained for the sole purpose intended.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

7 The development shall not be begun until the improvements (which expression shall include traffic control, pedestrian and cycle safety measures) to the highways listed below have either;

i. been carried out; or

ii. details have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority of arrangements which have been entered into which will secure that such improvement works will be carried out before the development is brought into use.

Highway Improvements:

(a) Works at the junction of Attercliffe Road and Warren Street to protect drivers making a right turn into Warren Street from Attercliffe Road.

63 (b) To provide along with the above requirement appropriate information, signs and markings and or other necessary highway construction to direct vehicles approaching the junction of Attercliffe Road with Warren Street, into the appropriate position to avoid conflict or collision with turning traffic.

To enable the above-mentioned highways to accommodate the increase in traffic, which, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, will be generated by the development.

8 Prior to the improvement works indicated in the preceding condition being carried out, full details of these improvement works shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

9 At all times that construction works are being carried out equipment shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority for the effective cleaning of the wheels and bodies of vehicles leaving the site so as to prevent the depositing of mud and waste on the highway but before the development is commenced full details of such equipment shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. When the above-mentioned equipment has been provided thereafter such equipment shall be used for the sole purpose intended in all instances and be properly maintained.

In the interests of the safety of road users.

10 The building shall not be used unless turning space for vehicles has been provided within the site, in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter such turning facilities shall be retained.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

11 Prior to the commencement of the use of the premises as a function room/restaurant as hereby approved, further details of flood emergency response measures and a flood alert and evacuation procedure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The use shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved measures and procedures in perpetuity unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

To reduce the impact of flooding on future occupants in accordance with PPS25 and Policy CS67 of the Sheffield Core Strategy.

12 The development must be carried out in complete accordance with the following approved documents, plan numbers 08-29, 08-30 Rev D and 08- 31 Rev B and rear car park plan Rev D, all dated 2 September 2009 unless otherwise authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

64 In order to define the permission.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

IB5 - Development in General Industry Areas IB9 - Conditions on Development in Industry and Business Areas IB12 - Training Centres & Community Facilities in Industry & Business Areas BE5 - Building Design and Siting CS64 - Climate Change, Resources and Sustainable Design of Developments CS67 - Flood Risk Management

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. It is noted that your planning application involves the construction or alteration of an access crossing to a highway maintained at public expense.

This planning permission DOES NOT automatically permit the layout or construction of the access crossing in question, this being a matter which is covered by Section 184 of the Highways Act 1980, and dealt with by:

Assistant Head of Highways Development Services Howden House 1 Union Street Sheffield S1 2SH

For access crossing approval you should contact the Highway Development Control Section of Sheffield City Council on Sheffield (0114) 2736136, quoting your planning permission reference number.

2. You are required, as part of this development, to carry out works within the public highway. You must not start any of this work until you have received a signed consent under the Highways Act 1980. An administration/inspection fee will be payable and a Bond required as part of the consent.

You should apply for a consent to: -

Highways Adoption Group Development Services Sheffield City Council Howden House, 1 Union Street Sheffield S1 2SH

For the attention of Mr S Turner Tel: (0114) 27 34383

3. As the proposed development abuts the public highway you are advised to contact the Highways Co-ordination Group on Sheffield 2736677, prior to commencing works. The Co-ordinator will be able to advise you of any pre- commencement condition surveys, permits, permissions or licences you may require in order to carry out your works.

4. The developer's attention is drawn to:

(i) Sections 4 and 7 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970, as amended; and

(ii) the code of Practice for Access of the Disabled to Buildings (British Standards Institution code of practice BS 8300) or any prescribed document replacing that code.

Section 4 sets requirements for access to, and facilities at, premises. Section 7 requires a notice or sign to be displayed, indicating that provision is made for the disabled.

If you require any further information please contact Brian Messider or Simon Ovendon on Sheffield 2734197.

5. Additional guidance on Flood Proofing and Flooding issues can be found in the Environment Agency Flood Line Publication ‘Damage Limitation’. For a copy please ring 0845 988 1188 or visit the website www.environment- agency.gov.uk

6. From the 6th April 2008, the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications and Deemed Applications) Regulations 2008 require that all requests for confirmation of compliance with planning conditions require a fee payable to the Local Planning Authority. An application to the Local Planning Authority will be required using the new national standard application forms. Printable forms can be found at www.sheffield.gov.uk/planning or apply online at www.planningportal.gov.uk. The charge for this type of application is £85 or £25 if it relates to a condition on a householder application for development.

66 Site Location

INTRODUCTION

An application, (ref no 09/00164/FUL), for the change of use of the existing industrial unit on site as a function room and restaurant was approved by the Area Board of 18 May 2009. This approval restricted use of the building between the hours of 17.00 hours and 24.00 hours Mondays to Fridays, and 09.00 hours and 24.00 hours Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. Demolition of a building fronting Attercliffe Road was also proposed to provide more parking in the frontage area. It is now proposed to retain this building for use in conjunction with the function room and restaurant uses. The change of use is the subject of this application.

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application site comprises of a collection of single storey industrial units formerly used as a furniture trade warehouse, situated to the south side of Attercliffe Road. The main buildings are set back approximately 15 metres from

67 the back edge of pavement on Attercliffe Road with a hard surfaced area in front. To the highway, the site comprises a gated entrance with a brick pier and railing boundary treatment. On the eastern side of the entrance is a further building with an elevation fronting onto the highway; this elevation includes a shuttered door. The building, like others on the site, is clad in blue, horizontally ridged, metal sheeting. To the south of the site, within the application site boundary is an undeveloped area that is accessed from Warren Street.

The site is located within a predominantly industrial area but also includes a range of other uses, including a Sikh Temple and community centre that is currently under construction to the south-east of the application site at the southern end of Warren Street.

It is proposed to retain the building, which was originally to be demolished, as a sweet selection centre in conjunction with the approved function room and restaurant uses. Changes to the north and west elevations are proposed. This will result in the vehicular door onto Attercliffe Road being replaced with a window, and on the western elevation windows being put in along with a ramped access to a further entrance.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

See introduction. In addition an application, reference number 09/02791/FUL, has been submitted in tandem with this application which proposes changes to the hours of opening of the restaurant to between 11.00 and 24.00 hours every day.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

None received

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Policy Issues

The application site is designated in the Sheffield Unitary Development Plan (UDP) as falling within a General Industry Area. In these areas, preferred uses are general industry and warehousing although community facilities and non- residential institutions are also considered acceptable (Policy IB5). Policy IB9 of the UDP states that changes of use will be permitted provided that it would not lead to a concentration of uses that would prejudice the dominance of industry and business and cause the loss of important industrial sites. Additionally, Policy IB12 states that community facilities will be encouraged where they meet the needs of ethnic minorities, and are easily accessible by public transport and safe to walk to and from.

As the uses of the building as approved are a mix of community, as defined by Use Class D1, and restaurant, as defined by Use Class A3 it was considered to be a sui-generic use. Such a mix of uses were considered broadly representative of a community facility, which was considered acceptable in industrial areas assuming there is no detriment to existing industrial uses, which should remain dominant. In

68 this case, the area would remain primarily industrial in character and it was therefore considered that the application complies with both Policy IB5 and IB9 of the UDP. It is also in accordance with Policy IB12 of the UDP, which encourages appropriate community facilities in Industry and Business Areas where it would meet the needs of young people, women, unemployed people, the elderly or ethnic minorities and where it is easily accessible. In this case, the applicant advised that the Asian community tended to have large weddings and the nearest venues are in Bradford, Manchester and Leicester. The applicant also contended that this would encourage the community to use a local facility with the associated local benefits. On this basis, the original proposal was also considered to comply with Policy IB12 and was therefore acceptable in terms of current local planning policy.

Overall the principle of the use of the buildings as a function room and restaurant was thus considered acceptable being close to the local community and providing services and facilities of a scale which could not be accommodated on other sites in the locality. The proposal increases the floor area of the function rooms/restaurant in providing a larger sweet serving area, but it does not increase the number of covers for the restaurant or other accommodation. Thus it will not increase any loss of non industrial or commercial buildings, indeed the building which is the subject of this application was originally proposed to be demolished.

Design Issues

Policy BE5 of the Unitary Development Plan seeks to achieve good design and the use of good quality materials with respect for the scale, form and architectural character of the area. The building that is the subject of the application projects forward of other buildings in the complex that will form the function rooms/restaurant. It is highly prominent from the highway as its end elevation is set on the back edge of the highway and it is clad in blue profile metal sheeting as per the rest of the buildings. Proposed changes to the external appearance of the building include the replacement of the current roller shutter entrance onto Attercliffe Road with a large window, further windows will be added to the western elevation, facing into the front car park, and an extra ramped entrance on that elevation. Such details are not considered to adversely affect the street scene, and will improve the appearance of the building, thus the proposal accords with Policy BE5 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Access Issues

The additional access is provided with a ramp and handrails. Other disabled access facilities are provided within the existing approval for the function rooms/restaurant.

Flood Risk Issues

Overall the whole site falls within a Flood Risk Zone 2 and partially within Zone 3. Policy CS67, ‘Flood Risk Management’ of the Core Strategy states that flood risk management is one of the most important ways of adapting to the predicted more intensive rainfall as a result of climate change. A flood risk assessment was submitted for the whole of the site in conjunction with the current approval,

69 (09/00164/FUL), to which the Environment Agency raised no objections to the change of use. This was subject to safe access and egress and flooding consideration being taken into account in the design of and construction of the development. This included flood proofing measures such as barriers on ground floor windows and access points and electrical services above flood levels. The proposed use of the building includes a floor level that is the same as the approved areas. Thus, as per the existing approval, the applicant will be advised to contact the Local Authorities Emergency Planners and the Environment Agency, and further details will be required as a condition of this approval. As such the proposal accords with Policy CS67 of the Core Strategy.

Highways Issues

As originally approved the building which is the subject of this application was to be demolished and four car parking spaces created in its place. With the retention of the building these spaces must be located elsewhere on the site to meet the parking requirements for the size of the venue. This has been achieved by rearranging the parking layout on land off Warren Street. The reduction in the number of vehicles using the Attercliffe Road entrance is considered beneficial for highways safety as any vehicles entering and leaving that access have to cross Attercliffe Road which is four lanes wide in front of the site.

Amenity Issues

Issues relating to amenity have been taken into account in the existing approval 09/00164/FUL and conditions will be retained in this approval for noise limiters and details of fume extraction.

Sustainability Issues

As per the existing approval for the reuse of buildings on the site there will be no major changes to the fabric of the retained building apart from windows, and noise insulation if required by a subsequent survey. Thus, it is not considered that the proposal has to meet the requirements of Policy CS64, ‘Climate Change, Resources and Sustainable Design of Developments’ of the Core Strategy.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

Although located within a General Industry Area in the Unitary Development Plan, the principle of the use of the group of buildings as function rooms for weddings and as a restaurant has been established by planning approval reference number 09/00164/FUL. Retention and reuse of that part of the building complex in conjunction with the approved uses will not increase the number of people using the facilities to be provided. Reduced car parking provision to the front of the site is adequately replaced in the main car park at the rear of the site. The retention of the building will not adversely affect the street scene and its use will not adversely affect the amenities of the area.

It is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions.

Case Number 09/02791/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Change of opening hours of restaurant to 1100 hours to 2400 hours every day (Variation of condition 3 of planning permission no. 09/00164/FUL) (amended description)

Location 286 Attercliffe Road Sheffield S4 7WZ

Date Received 03/09/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent Messrs J K And W Akhtar And M Zaheer

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

IB5 - Development in General Industry Areas IB9 - Conditions on Development in Industry and Business Areas IB12 - Training Centres & Community Facilities in Industry & Business Areas

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

71 This informative is intended as a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission. For further detail on the decision please see the application report by contacting the Planning Records section on 2734220 or by visiting Sheffield City Council’s website at www.sheffield.gov.uk/your- city-council/council-meetings/planning-boards

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. The applicant is advised that as the proposal is an amendment to a condition originally approved in application reference number 09/00164/FUL, all other conditions in that approval remain relevant to the development on the site.

Site Location

72 INTRODUCTION

An application, (09/00164/FUL), for the change of use of the existing industrial unit on site to a function room and restaurant was approved by the Area Board of 18th May 2009. This approval restricted use of the building between the hours of 1700 hours and 2400 hours Mondays to Fridays, and 0900 hours and 2400 hours Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. Demolition of a building fronting Attercliffe Road was also proposed to provide more parking in the frontage area.

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application site comprises a collection of single storey industrial units formerly used as a furniture trade warehouse, situated to the south of Attercliffe Road. The main buildings are set back approximately 15 metres from the back edge of the pavement on Attercliffe Road with a hard surfaced area in front. To the road, the site comprises a gated entrance with a brick pier and railing boundary treatment. To the south of the site, within the application site boundary is an undeveloped area that is accessed from Warren Street.

Approval is sought to change the hours of operation of the restaurant to between 1100 hours to 2400 hours Mondays to Fridays, other opening times including those of the function room are to remain the same.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

See introduction. In addition an application, reference number 09/02802/CHU has been submitted in tandem with this application which proposes the change of use of a building, originally to be demolished, as a sweet selection area, to be used in conjunction with the restaurant and function rooms.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

None received

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Policy Issues

73 states that community facilities will be encouraged where they meet the needs of ethnic minorities are easily accessible by public transport and safe to walk to and from. As such the proposal accords with Policies IB5, IB9 and IB12 of the Unitary Development Plan.

The principle of restaurant and function room uses has been established by approval 09/00164/FUL.

Design Issues

There are no changes proposed to the building as a result of the change in hours.

Amenity Issues

The site is located away from residential areas; thus, in principle, it was originally considered that the late evening and weekend use would not result in a loss of amenity for local residents. The hours of operation of the proposed function room, between 1700 hours to 2400 hours during the week and between 0900 and 2400 on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays, as approved by application no 09/00169/FUL, are outside normal business times and thus, they should not conflict with the operation of surrounding businesses. The proposed change in hours only relates to the restaurant use which should not generate large numbers of visitors during working hours, unlike the function room use. It is thus considered that extending the opening hours would also not conflict with surrounding businesses.

Other amenity issues have been considered and conditioned in application reference number 09/00164/FUL.

Highways Issues

There are no changes to the approved parking provision as approved by 09/00164/FUL. The amount of off street parking originally approved should be capable of accommodating day time parking for restaurant visitors.

Flood Risk Issues

The site falls within a Flood Risk Zone 2 and partially within Zone 3. A Flood Risk assessment was submitted, and the Environment Agency was consulted, for application no 09/00164/FUL. The Environment Agency raised no objections to the change of use of the existing buildings subject to safe access and egress and flooding consideration being taken into account in the design and construction of the development. This included flood proofing measures such as barriers on ground floor doors and windows and access points and electrical services above possible flood levels.

Accessibility Issues

Accessibility of the building will not be changed from that to be provided in approved plans for 09/00164/FUL.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The extension of hours of the previously approved restaurant use are not considered to adversely affect the amenities of existing businesses in the area due to the scale of restaurant use and any potential noise and smell issues will be controlled by conditions.

It is therefore recommended that the Area Board approve the application subject to conditions.

Case Number 09/02729/RG3

Application Type Application Submitted by the Council

Proposal Widening of existing vehicular opening including relocation of stone columns and provision of hardstanding (Full planning application submitted under Reg. 3 - 1992) (Amended drawing dated 06/10/2009)

Location 15/15A Victoria Road Broomhall Sheffield S10 2DJ

Date Received 26/08/2009

Team SOUTH

Applicant/Agent Sheffield City Council

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act.

2 Before the development is commenced, details of all proposed external materials and finishes, including windows, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

3 The development must be carried out in complete accordance with the following approved documents, plan received 06/10/2009 unless otherwise authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to define the permission.

4 Prior to the commencement of development, details of a hedgerow to be planted between the wall at the front of the site and the hardstanding shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Such hedgerow shall be implemented within 6 months of the completion of the hardstanding and the developer shall notify the Council of such

76 completion. Thereafter the hedgerow shall be retained, cultivated and maintained for a period of 5 years from the date of completion and any plant failures within that 5 year period shall be replaced unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

H5 - Flats, Bed-sitters and Shared Housing H11 - Development in Housing Areas in Nether Edge and Broomhall H14 - Conditions on Development in Housing Areas BE5 - Building Design and Siting

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. From the 6th April 2008, the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications and Deemed Applications) Regulations 2008 require that all requests for confirmation of compliance with planning conditions require a fee payable to the Local Planning Authority. An application to the Local Planning Authority will be required using the new national standard application forms. Printable forms can be found at www.sheffield.gov.uk/planning or apply online at www.planningportal.gov.uk. The charge for this type of application is £85 or £25 if it relates to a condition on a householder application for development.

77 Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application site is a two storey, stone detached villa set in a spacious garden. There is a gable feature at roof level at the front of the house and gable ends at either side. There is mature planting on the boundaries of the garden and at the front is a low stone wall with an entrance with stone gateposts either side serving a drive leading down one side of the front garden to the side and rear of the house. This is an attractive Victorian property, typical of the surrounding buildings, which are all within the Broomhall Conservation Area.

The house is divided into two flats and the front garden is associated with the upper floor flat. This application proposes a widening of the entrance and the creation of a short drive in the front garden to allow a vehicle to park there. The plan, as amended shows a hardstanding within the front section of the garden, constructed of stone setts. The two gate posts at the entrance would be retained although one would be moved and a short section of wall (0.8 metres) lost to allow for this widening.

REPRESENTATIONS

12 letters of objection have been received from neighbours, interested individuals and Broomhall Park Association.

- the proposal would spoil the existing traditional garden - there would be an adverse impact on the character of the immediate street scene and the Conservation Area - widening of the original Victorian gateway is not necessary and an alternative parking solution should be found - the application is contrary to the Broomhall Conservation Area Management Proposals because the loss of the gate posts would have a negative impact. - the appearance of the posts and wall would change because of the widening and this would detract from the character of the Conservation Area. - The rebuilt stone wall would not be of the same quality or appearance as the existing wall - the loss of the garden to allow parking would detract from the Conservation Area.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Land Use Policy

The adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP) shows that the application site is part of the Broomhall Housing Area. Policy H11 of the UDP deals with the land use in this area and housing is the preferred use. There would be no change of use as part of this application, but Members should be aware that there are no permitted development rights associated with flats.

The Broomhall Conservation Area Management Proposals have been approved by the Council and these set out guidance on preserving and enhancing the character of the Conservation Area.

The Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy has been adopted but none of the policies specifically relate to this application.

DESIGN AND APPEARANCE

Policy H14 – Conditions on Development in Housing Areas – says that new development should be well designed and in scale and character with the surroundings.

Policy BE5 – Building Design and Siting expects the use of good quality materials in new development.

The proposal as amended shows a widening of the entrance serving the existing drive. This would be by 800mm and although one of the gate posts would be

79 moved by this distance, it would be repositioned next to the existing stone wall at the front of the garden. The same length of the stone wall would be lost to allow this.

A new hardstanding of stone setts, amended from the original proposal of tarmac, would be introduced into the front section of the front garden. This would be 3 metres in width and would be set back 2.4 metres into the garden. Access to this would be taken from the existing drive.

The driveway would be widened, but there is no uniform width established on Victoria Road. An addition of 800mm to the drive width would not significantly alter the character of the street scene. Also, the introduction of a hardstanding of stone setts into the front garden would be absorbed into the garden as a whole and would also be part screened from the street by retained planting and garden features. The use of stone setts is a good quality material, appropriate in the setting and complements the stone exterior of the villa.

It is considered that the amended proposal meets the requirements of Policies H14 and BE5 of the UDP.

IMPACT ON THE CONSERVATION AREA

The site is within a Conservation Area and Policy BE16 of the UDP deals with Development in Conservation Areas. This says that planning permission will only be granted for development that preserves or enhances the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.

The Broomhall Conservation Area Management Proposals identifies the loss or alterations carried out to gateposts as having a negative impact.

The gateposts would be retained and the only difference would be that one would be moved 800mm to allow the drive to be widened. The existing stone wall would be adapted to allow for this. This would leave a very minor impact on the character and setting of the Conservation Area. The hardstanding would be within the front garden and the back of this would be retained. The use of stone setts for the hardstanding is appropriate in the Conservation Area.

It is considered that the character and setting of the Conservation Area would be preserved in accordance with Policy BE16 and the Broomhall Conservation Area Management Proposals.

ACCESS AND PARKING

Policies H5 and H14 of the UDP dealing with flats and conditions in housing areas respectively, expect safe access for vehicles and appropriate off street car parking.

The widening of the existing driveway entrance would allow a safe vehicle entry and exit and an off road parking space would be provided in an area of great on-street parking pressure.

80 The proposal satisfies policies H5 and H14 in this respect.

RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS

The proposal would not spoil the traditional garden because the stone setts hardstanding would be absorbed into the larger garden and the majority of the existing garden features would be retained.

There would not be an adverse impact on the street scene or the Conservation Area and this has been covered earlier in this report.

There is no need to find an alternative parking solution as this proposal is considered to be acceptable.

The quality and appearance of the stone wall would be controlled by an appropriate condition.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The site is the front garden associated with the upper flat within a Victorian detached stone wall villa which lies inside the Broomhall Conservation Area. It is proposed to widen the existing drive entrance by 800mm, but retain both existing gate posts. A hardstanding of stone setts would be introduced into the front part of the garden.

The proposal would have a very limited impact in the street scene and there would be no harm to the character of the Broomhall Conservation Area.

The policy criteria set out in this report is met and the application is considered to be acceptable. The proposal is, therefore, recommended for conditional approval.

Case Number 09/02637/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Erection of medical centre with associated landscaping and parking (Amended plans received 02/11/2009)

Location Land At Junction With Park Grange Road Beldon Road Sheffield

Date Received 20/08/2009

Team SOUTH

Applicant/Agent Blue Sky Architects

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

3 Before the development is commenced samples of all proposed external materials and finishes, including windows, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

4 The surfaces of roads and footways are not approved. Prior to the commencement of development, details of such surfaces shall have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The roads and footways shall be completed in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of the use and retained thereafter.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

5 The medical centre shall not be used unless the car parking accommodation for 24 cars as shown on the approved plans has been provided in accordance with those plans and thereafter such car parking accommodation shall be retained for the sole purpose intended.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

6 The gradient of shared pedestrian/vehicular access shall not exceed 1:12 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

7 Before the development is commenced, details of the means of ingress and egress for vehicles engaged in the construction of the development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the arrangements for restricting the vehicles to the approved ingress and egress points. Ingress and egress for such vehicles shall be obtained only at the approved points.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

8 At all times that construction works are being carried out equipment shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority for the effective cleaning of the wheels and bodies of vehicles leaving the site so as to prevent the depositing of mud and waste on the highway but before the development is commenced full details of such equipment shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. When the above-mentioned equipment has been provided thereafter such equipment shall be used for the sole purpose intended in all instances and be properly maintained.

In the interests of the safety of road users.

9 Before the development is commenced, full details of suitable and sufficient cycle parking accommodation within the site shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the medical centre shall not be used unless such cycle parking has been provided in accordance with the approved plans and, thereafter, such cycle parking accommodation shall be retained.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

10 Prior to the occupation of any part of the development, a detailed Travel Plan(s), designed to: reduce the need for and impact of motor vehicles, including fleet operations; increase site accessibility; and to facilitate and encourage alternative travel modes, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Detailed Travel Plan(s) shall be developed in accordance with a previously approved Framework

83 Travel Plan for the proposed development, where that exists. The Travel Plan(s) shall include:

a) Clear and unambiguous objectives and modal split targets; b) An implementation programme, with arrangements to review and report back on progress being achieved to the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the 'Monitoring Schedule' for written approval of actions consequently proposed, c) The results and findings of the monitoring shall be independently verified/validated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. d) The verified/validated results will be used to further define targets and inform actions proposed to achieve the approved objectives and modal split targets.

On occupation, the approved Travel Plan(s) shall thereafter be implemented, subject to any variations approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of delivering sustainable forms of transport, in accordance with the Transport Policies in the adopted Unitary Development Plan for Sheffield and PPG13.

11 Before any work on site is commenced, a comprehensive and detailed hard and soft landscape scheme for the site shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The landscape works shall be implemented prior to the development being brought into use or within an alternative timescale to be first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the landscaped areas shall be retained and shall not be used for any other purpose without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority. They shall be cultivated and maintained for a period of 5 years from the date of implementation and any plant failures within that five year period shall be replaced.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality.

12 The Local Planning Authority shall be notified when the landscape works are completed.

To ensure that the Local Planning Authority can confirm when the maintenance periods specified in associated conditions/condition have commenced

13 Before work on site is commenced, full details of suitable inclusive access and facilities for disabled people, both to and into the building(s) and within the curtilage of the site, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the medical centre shall not be used unless such inclusive access and facilities have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. Thereafter such inclusive access and facilities shall be retained. (Reference should also be made to the Code of Practice BS8300).

To ensure ease of access and facilities for disabled persons at all times.

14 Before the development is commenced a Phase 2 Risk Assessment, to characterize the contamination on site and propose a remediation scheme to ensure safe redevelopment, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Should any previously unsuspected contamination be encountered during the development, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified within one working day of its discovery, together with any proposed amendments to the proposed remediation scheme. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme and the applicant shall provide written verification that the remediation has been completed as approved, within 21 days of the approved scheme being completed.

In order to protect the health and safety of future occupiers and users of the site.

15 Unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority, no building or other obstruction shall be located over or within 5 metres either side of the centre line of the water main which crosses the site.

In order to allow sufficient access for maintenance and repair works at all times.

16 The development must be carried out in complete accordance with the following approved plans:

3217-P-003 Rev C 3217-P-004 Rev B 3217-P-005 Rev E 3217-P-006 Rev D 3217-P-008 Rev B 3217-P-009 Rev A LL-164-002 Rev A 3217-P-011 Rev A 3217-P-012 Rev A

Unless otherwise authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to define the permission.

17 Before any work on site is commenced, a report shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority identifying how the following will be provided:

(a) A minimum of 10% of the predicted energy needs of the completed development being obtained from decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy; and

85 (b) The generation of further renewable or low carbon energy or incorporation of design measures sufficient to reduce the development's overall predicted carbon dioxide emissions by 20%. This would include the decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy to satisfy (a).

Any agreed renewable or low carbon energy equipment, connection to decentralised or low carbon energy sources or additional energy efficiency measures shall have been installed before any part of the development is occupied and a post-installation report shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that the agreed measures have been installed. Thereafter the agreed equipment, connection or measures shall be retained in use and maintained for the lifetime of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to ensure that new development makes energy savings in the interests of mitigating the effects of climate change, in accordance with Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy Policy CS65.

18 The development hereby approved shall be constructed to achieve a minimum rating of BREEAM ‘very good’ and before the development is occupied (or within an alternative timescale to be agreed) the relevant certification, demonstrating that BREEAM ‘very good’ has been achieved, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of mitigating the effects of climate change, in accordance with Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy Policy CS64.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

H10 - Development in Housing Areas H14 - Conditions on Development in Housing Areas BE5 - Building Design and Siting BE7 - Design of Buildings Used by the Public CS44 - Health Centres CS64 - Climate Change, Resources and Sustainable Design of Developments

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

86 or by visiting Sheffield City Council’s website at www.sheffield.gov.uk/your- city-council/council-meetings/planning-boards

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

Site Location

87 LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application site is currently vacant land located next to the junction of Beldon Road and Park Grange Road. The land is part of larger clearance site that was formerly occupied by housing. The land falls away to the rear where there is further vacant land with a development site for new housing, which is being constructed. On the opposite side of the site from the road junction is a sunken circle with railings, part of which falls within the site. At the front is a tram stop, serving Supertram, which runs along Park Grange Road. There is a footpath running through the site and all surrounding uses are residential.

The application, as amended, is for a new Medical Centre serving the surrounding community with associated parking and landscaping. Briefly, the proposal comprises a two storey Medical Centre, including a Pharmacy that would front Park Grange Road. Due to level differences, the building would be three storeys where it faces north, towards the edge of Norfolk Park. The main vehicular access and car park would be on the northern side, but a drop-off point is proposed on the east side, between the main access and the Beldon Road/Park Grange Road junction. There would be a main entrance on both sides.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter has been received from a local resident which makes the following points:

- the design is unimaginative and would date quickly - a better design solution is preferred - there should be a strong commitment to maintenance and security to ensure that the building does not become dilapidated.

Councillor John Robson has also submitted comments:

- the design appears to be bold and imaginative - the north elevation does not appear to follow through the same design concepts as the front - care should be taken on security measures and avoidance of potential for graffiti.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Land Use Policy

The adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP) shows that the site is within a housing policy area. Policy H10 deals with development in housing areas and this says that although the preferred use is Housing, Community Facilities and Institutions are acceptable. The proposed Medical Centre would fall into this category, so the broad principle of the use would be acceptable.

Policy CS44 of the Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy deals with Health Centres and this says that Primary Health Centres shall be developed in

88 local communities with the highest level of needs. This application meets the requirements of this policy, in principle.

The Norfolk Park Masterplan provides guidance on the overall redevelopment of the area to the south and east of Norfolk Park and this shows the application site to be part of a Neighbourhood Centre.

Sustainability

Policy CS64 of the Core Strategy addresses Climate Change, Resources and Sustainable Design of Developments.

All new non-residential development of more than 500 square metres gross internal floorspace should achieve a BREEAM rating of at least ‘Very Good’. The proposed building has a gross floorspace of 1,800 square metres.

This Medical Centre is being developed with a target of achieving ‘Excellent’ level. The applicant has stated that sustainability issues are integral to the design, a key focus and the following issues are addressed as part of this:

- measures to reduce energy, carbon emissions and resource consumption - measures to manage the environmental impacts of the building during construction and operation - measures to promote health and wellbeing of users and visitors - measures to reduce pollution - measures to reduce waste and promote recycling - provision for sustainable modes of transport and goods links with the local community - promoting and protecting ecology and biodiversity - respecting local character and heritage.

With specific reference to the sustainability of the building, it is intended to achieve the ‘Excellent’ rating by means such as high standards of energy efficiency, solar energy, passive heating and cooling, natural light and ventilation, water recycling, high insulation specifications and promoting recycling.

This approach is encouraging but the applicant has not fully demonstrated that the minimum ‘Very Good’ BREEAM level has been achieved. This can be controlled by the inclusion of an appropriate condition.

Policy CS65 of the Core Strategy seeks to reduce carbon emissions. Significant developments are required to demonstrate that a minimum of 10% of their predicated energy needs are from decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy.

The applicant has stated that it is their intention to demonstrate that at least 10% of their energy needs will be met in accordance with Policy CS65. Indeed, they aim to exceed this significantly, but a condition would be attached controlling this. This

89 will, in fact, be achieved by using a bespoke power system, generating both power and heat and fuelled by sustainable biodiesel, sourced from waste vegetable oil.

Layout, Design and External Appearance

Policy H14 of the UDP deals with conditions on development in housing areas and this says that new buildings should be well designed in scale and character with neighbouring uses. Policy BE5 encourages good design and the use of good quality materials.

The site is elongated and fronts directly onto Park Grange Road and the tram stop. This has dictated the building layout, which reflects the dimensions of the site. There is vacant land at the rear, between the proposal and the housing site that is being built, but this land is earmarked for a neighbourhood centre. The proposal would be an integral part of this.

The layout and design, to a certain extent, has been influenced by the needs and requirements of the building, the intention being to provide a high quality health and medical service for the community.

The layout, as amended, shows a long building fronting onto Park Grange Road, two storeys high on this elevation. The main entrance would be centrally located, directly accessible from the tram stop and access would be available straight into the Health Centre and also the Pharmacy which would be located within the building at one side.

Due to a significant fall in levels, the rear of the building would be three storeys. This would face on to the car park which would have provision for staff, patient and disabled. The main vehicle access serving the whole site would be on the north side from Beldon Road and is designed so that it can be easily extended towards Samuel Road and serve the future neighbourhood centre as well as the Health Centre. Between this new access road and the junction of Beldon Road and Park Grange Road, a drop off point is proposed.

The design and external appearance of the building has been improved as part of the application process. Prior to the submission of the application, the proposal was presented to the Urban Design Panel, an independent forum composed of experienced architects, and their comments can be summarised as follows:

- they were generally supportive of a building of simple integrity - the design, as presented, required further development - the north entrance and the windows need improving - both entrances could be further emphasised and the roofscape broken up - the pharmacy should have windows - a footpath from Park Grange Road to the new neighbourhood centre should be shown - a green roof should be included - the room sizes appear to be dictating the exterior.

90 As part of the application process, the design and external appearance has improved and this is now acceptable, having met many of the points set out by the Urban Design Panel.

The main external material would be white brick, broken down by coloured panels, aluminium curtain walling and blue brick. There are no front or rear elevations because both the main north and south frontages would be highly visible. The windows have been improved and these create a horizontal and vertical balance to break the exterior down. It is important to ensure that the building is secure, so open mesh roller shutters would be used, particularly at ground level.

The roof would be a very shallow monopitch of standing seam construction. A green roof was requested by officers and considered by the applicant, but owing to the design of the building it would result in significant additional cost which cannot be met by the project. In addition the reduction in rainwater run off works against proposals to harvest rainwater.

The external façades would be broken up by expressed and recessed features that would take advantage of shadow and this would break down the elevations and create interest.

There is resistance to providing windows in the pharmacy because of security issues and they often suffer from the rear of shelves being on view. Many pharmacies in Sheffield no longer have a display and the lack of windows at this location is acceptable.

The design and external appearance has improved since the original submission and this is now considered to be acceptable, meeting the requirements of Policies H14 and BE5.

Impact on the Amenities of Existing Residents

The area around the site is characterised by two storey houses built in the hillsides that fall down towards Norfolk Park. Supertram has a strong presence in the area, running along Park Grange Road. The proposal, being two and three storeys in height, would reflect the scale and massing of the area. It is a much larger building that the houses, but it would be broken down to reflect this smaller scale. The building, due to the distances between the site and existing houses, would not be overbearing, overdominant or result in a loss of privacy. Policy H14 of the UDP requires new development to preserve the amenities of local residents and not cause them harm.

The proposal would be a quiet use and would not result in noise or disturbance. There are quite high ambient, background noise levels caused by traffic and the tram on Park Grange Road.

Transport, Access and Car Parking

Policy H14 of the UDP says that there should be a suitable access with appropriate off-street car parking and the safety of pedestrians should not be compromised.

The site is very well served by both the tram and buses and there are tram and bus stops very close to the site. Also, there is a low car ownership level in the vicinity so a low level of car usage associated with the proposal is envisaged. There is a drop off point next to the site and visitors have only a short walk from this to either entrance.

Both new vehicle entrances are safe and have good visibility in either direction. The dimensions of the main access and new access road are acceptable for both the proposal and the likely development proposed as part of the new neighbourhood centre, which would be located between the Medical Centre and the new housing development further down Beldon Road. The road layout takes account of the future extension into the adjoining site.

There would be three spaces within the drop off area, which is sufficient, as no parking is allowed and there would be a quick vehicle turnaround.

A total of nine parking spaces would be provided for patients with two of these being for disabled people and there would be motorcycle and cycle parking provided. Given the low level of car ownership and good transport links, the parking provision for visitors is acceptable.

There would be 15 spaces for staff parking.

A new pavement would be provided along the Park Grange Road and Beldon Road frontages and a footpath link from the tram stop past the west side of the Medical Centre down to the neighbourhood centre site is shown.

The transport, access and parking proposals are considered to be acceptable and in accordance with Policy H14 of the UDP.

Disabled Access

Policy BE7 of the UDP deals with the design of buildings that are used by the public and this requires such buildings to be accessible to people with disabilities and have appropriate car parking.

The parking, including disabled, is acceptable. The disabled parking is close to the entrance on the north side of the building.

The disabled provision is acceptable subject to some detailed alterations which would be controlled by a condition.

Landscaping

The layout shows indicative landscaping along the frontage onto Park Grange Road and also at the lower northern level. The details can be controlled by appropriate conditions.

92 Security

It is important that the site remains secure and safe. Mesh, see-through roller shutters are proposed at ground floor levels and staff car parking would be in a secure environment.

The original proposals had the cycle parking in a vulnerable location on the north side, but this has been relocated to the south side, at a much more visible location. Good quality external lighting would improve security and this can be conditioned.

Remaining Matters

There is no risk of flooding on the site and it is located on a hillside above Norfolk Park.

Ground contamination would be controlled by a condition.

There are no ecological issues as this is a grassed site, cleared of development some years ago.

There are no trees on the site.

RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS

The design, after improvements, is considered to be acceptable.

The north elevation is more closely linked to the south façade following design improvements.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

This application is for a new Medical Centre for Norfolk Park that would be located on a vacant sloping site at the junction of Park Grange Road and Beldon Road. The design, as amended, is acceptable. The south facing elevation fronting onto Park Grange Road would be two storeys and on the other side, the height would extend to three storeys because of falling land levels.

The exterior would be interesting, vibrant, recognisable and appropriate for its location.

Vehicle and pedestrian access would be acceptable and safe and the future development of a neighbourhood centre next to the new Health Centre has been incorporated into the layout, where necessary.

This proposal will be of great benefit to the Norfolk Park community and is in line with appropriate UDP and Core Strategy policy. This application is, therefore, recommended for conditional approval.

Case Number 09/02591/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Application to vary condition 6. imposed by 06/02808/FUL (restriction of opening hours) to allow the use of the restaurant between 0730 hours and 2300 hours Mondays to Saturdays and 1000 hours to 1800 hours on Sundays and Bank Holidays (Application Under Section 73)

Location The Point 69 Division Street Sheffield S1 4GE

Date Received 13/08/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent C A Design Services

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

6 The premises shall only be used for purposes within Use Class A3 (food and drink) between 0730 hours and 2330 hours on Mondays to Saturdays and between 1000 hours and 1800 hours on Sundays and Public Holidays.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

S3 - Development in the Central Shopping Core S10 - Conditions on Development in Shopping Areas CS17 - City Centre Quarters City Centre Living Strategy

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. The applicant is advised that this application is a variation of Condition 6 of planning permission 06/02808/FUL such that the remaining conditions attached to 06/02808/FUL (as appropriate) are still relevant to the on-going operation of these premises.

2. The applicant is advised to note the content of Condition 7 of 06/02808/FUL, which advises that the A3 (food and drink) outlet shall not be used unless suitable apparatus for the arrestment and discharge of fumes or gases has been installed. But before such equipment is installed, details thereof shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. After installation such equipment shall be retained and operated for the purpose for which it was installed.

3. From the 6th April 2008, the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications and Deemed Applications) Regulations 2008 require that all requests for confirmation of compliance with planning conditions require a fee payable to the Local Planning Authority. An application to the Local Planning Authority will be required using the new national standard application forms. Printable forms can be found at www.sheffield.gov.uk/planning or apply online at www.planningportal.gov.uk. The charge for this type of application is £85 or £25 if it relates to a condition on a householder application for development.

95 Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

This application relates to a commercial unit at 69 Division Street, which forms part of the recently completed development at 65-69 Division Street, now referred to as ‘The Point’. The unit is presently being fitted out and has consent for use as a café within Use A3. In its entirety, the development is bounded by Division Street to the north, Rockingham Lane to the east, Division Lane to the south and the adjacent buildings at 71 (Green and Benz jewellers) and 73-75 Division Street to the west.

The Point extends to five storeys in height and comprises two commercial units on the ground floor providing 181 square metres of retail space (Use Class A1) at 65- 67 Division Street and 152 square metres of café/restaurant space (Use Class A3) at 69 Division Street (the application site). Above the commercial ground floor there are 33 residential units on the first to fifth floors.

96 The original planning permission for the mixed-use development of The Point, which was granted in October 2006 (06/02808/FUL), imposed a condition (No.6) in relation to the hours of use of any A3 (food and drink) unit such that:

‘The proposed food and drink use (Class A3) shall only be used between 0900 hours and 2330 hours, Mondays to Saturdays and 0900 hours and 2300 hours on Sundays and Public Holidays.’

This application seeks to amend Condition 6 to allow the premises to open earlier to maximise customer opportunities in the morning. It seeks to amend Condition 6 to enable the café to open between 0730 and 2330 on Mondays to Saturdays and between 1000 and 1800 on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

It is relevant to note that Costa Coffee at 40 Division Street, which lies opposite the application site, was granted approval in June 2008 for use as a coffee bar between the hours of 0700 and 2300 on any day (08/01715/CHU).

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

09/01081/FUL: Alterations to first-floor to create six residential units Approved: 19.05.2009

06/02808/FUL: Erection of a 1 x 5 storey building comprising A1/A3 at basement, ground and first floor with 27 residential units above. Approved 17.10.2006

06/00798/CAC: Demolition of the existing buildings (unlisted buildings within the Conservation Area). Approved: 17.10.2006

06/00797/FUL: Demolition of existing building & construction of 1 x 5 storey building comprising A1/A3 (Retail/Food & Drink) at basement, ground & first floor with 30 residential units; and 06/00798/CAC: Demolition of the existing buildings (unlisted buildings within the Conservation Area)

Withdrawn: June 2006: These applications were submitted in March 2006 but were withdrawn following concerns raised with regard to design, scale and massing.

00/00926/OUT: Erection of a four-storey office block with conference, café and retail facilities. Approved: 18.06.01

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

The application was advertised by way of site notice and press notice as a development affecting the City Centre Conservation Area and by neighbour notification. No representations have been received.

97 PLANNING ASSESSMENT

This application proposes to vary the hours of opening of 69 Division Street from 0900 hours and 2330 hours on Mondays to Saturdays and 0900 hours and 2300 hours on Sundays and Public Holidays, which was a condition of the original approval for the development of this site, to 0730 to 2330 on Mondays to Saturdays and between 1000 and 1800 on Sundays and Bank Holidays. In essence, the applicant seeks to open an hour and a half earlier on Mondays to Saturdays in comparison to the original approval, to capture the morning trade as well as working to reduced hours on Sundays and Bank Holidays. The key issues to consider in the assessment of this proposal include the following:

(i) The principle of development: Policy and Land Use; (ii) The impact of the revised hours of opening on the amenity of adjoining residential occupiers.

Policy and Land Use

The principle of an A3 unit in this location has been established by the granting of planning permission in 2006 (06/02808/FUL) for a mixed-use development and is not for consideration as part of this application.

It is relevant to note, however, that within the Sheffield Adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP), the application site is designated within the Central Shopping Area. Policy S3 of the UDP advises that within such areas, food and drink uses are preferred such that the use of this unit as a café fully complies with Policy S3.

Policy S10 of the UDP relates to Conditions on Development in Shopping Areas and advises that new development or change of use will be permitted subject to a number of parameters, including (as relevant to this site) S10 (b) that such development will not cause residents or visitors in any hotel, hostel, residential institution or housing to suffer from unacceptable living conditions, including air pollution, noise, other nuisance or risk to health or safety. This is considered in the report below.

The application site also falls within the Devonshire Quarter Action Plan, which seek to promote a vibrant mixed-use area with city living, niche shops, restaurants and bars, to which this application is also consistent.

The Sheffield Core Strategy, which was adopted on 4th March 2009, forms part of the Local Development Framework that will replace the UDP in due course and is also applicable to this site.

Policy CS17 of the Core Strategy relates to the City Centre Quarters and advises that the distinctive and fundamental roles of different quarters of the City Centre will be consolidated and strengthened. As noted above, the occupation and viable use of the premises as a café accords with the aspirations for the Devonshire Quarter as a vibrant mixed-use area.

98 Amenity of nearby residential occupiers

The principle issue in determining this application is the impact of the extended early morning opening hours on the amenity of nearby residential occupiers. In this case, there are 33 residential units above the premises, as well as further residential premises opposite at Phoenix Court and nearby at Flockton Court.

The applicant is not seeking to change the closing time, which will remain at 11.30pm in accordance with the original planning approval. However, in order to maximise early morning trade within the City, it is proposed that the premises be allowed to operate from 0730 rather than the 0900 originally approved. Additionally, the applicant has advised that the opening hours on Sundays and Bank Holidays will become 1000 to 1800 rather than the 0900 hours and 2300 hours originally approved.

As noted above, Policy S10b of the UDP advises that development within Shopping Areas will not be permitted where it would cause residents or visitors in any hotel, hostel, residential institution or housing to suffer from unacceptable living conditions by virtue of noise pollution or any other nuisance.

Further guidance on the development of mixed-uses within the City Centre and the potential conflict between residential amenity and food and drink uses is provided within the City Centre Living Strategy (CCLS), which was adopted in 2004.

Guideline 8 of the CCLS refers to the issue of noise, arising from mixed-use developments. More specifically, it acknowledges that ‘residents of a major City Centre gain many advantages from central living in exchange for certain trade-offs, one of which is that suburban standards of quietness, especially at night, cannot be guaranteed’.

Guideline 10 of the CCLS relates more specifically to A3 uses and the extension of hours to A3 units and advises that:

‘In locations where the residential amenity of residents will not be seriously affected, the extension of A3 hours could be appropriate, provided that music is not the main attraction.’

In this case, it is acknowledged that the application site is mixed-use with new residential units on the upper floors. However, these new units were constructed with due regard to the commercial uses on the ground floor and to their City Centre location such that appropriate acoustic glazing has been fitted to the street elevations to minimise noise disturbance. It is also the case that the building is constructed with a concrete slab between the ground and first floor with a thickness of at least 450mm; this construction achieves a sound insulation performance in excess of recommended standards for the transmission of noise. It is therefore considered that the extended hours of use of this A3 unit to allow 0730 opening will not be unduly detrimental to the residents above.

In terms of more general levels of disturbance, it must be acknowledged, as set out in the City Centre Living Strategy, that residents within the City Centre cannot

99 expect the same noise levels as more suburban parts of the City and to allow a café to open at 0730 to catch the morning trade is not considered unreasonable. In addition, the applicant is seeking to reduce the hours of opening on Sundays and Bank Holidays from 0900 hours to 2300 originally approved to between the hours of 1000 and 1800, which is of benefit to the surrounding residents. Finally, it is relevant to note that Costa Coffee, which lies opposite the site, has permission to open at 0700.

It is therefore considered that the extension of hours at 69 Division Street to allow early morning opening will not result in undue levels of noise disturbance to nearby residents within this City Centre location and it is therefore in accordance with Policy S10 (b) and the objectives of the City Centre Living Strategy.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

This application relates to the ground floor unit at 69 Division Street, which has permission to operate within Use Class A3 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order as a café/restaurant. This unit forms part of a mixed-use development comprising a further retail unit at ground floor, which has recently opened as a clothes shop (Use Class A1) with 33 residential apartments above, for which planning permission was approved in October 2006. This permission was granted subject to a number of conditions including a restriction on the hours of use of any future A3 unit between 0900 hours and 2330 hours on Mondays to Saturdays and 0900 hours and 2300 hours on Sundays and Public Holidays.

This application seeks to amend the hours of opening to allow the applicant to meet the morning trade; it therefore proposes to amend the condition to allow opening between the hours 0730 and 2330 on Mondays to Saturdays and to reduce the hours of opening on Sundays and Bank Holidays to between 1000 and 1600.

The extension of hours to a City Centre premises is a balance between ensuring the vitality and vibrancy of the City Centre and protecting the amenity of residential occupiers within the urban core. In this case, the nearest residential units lie above the application site but these have been designed with appropriate acoustic glazing and floor to floor insulation to minimise the transmission of noise and limit general noise pollution from the street. Moreover, 0730 is not considered unduly early in a City Centre location and is, in fact, later than the opening hours of Costa Coffee, which lies opposite the application site and operates between the hours of 0700 and 2300 on any day.

It is therefore concluded that the extension of hours at 69 Division Street to allow early morning opening and the reduction in Sunday and Bank Holiday opening hours will not result in undue levels of noise disturbance to nearby residents within the City Centre in accordance with Policy S10b of the UDP and advice within the City Centre Living Strategy. The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions.

100

Case Number 09/02565/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Use of unit as nightclub

Location 17-21 Charter Square Sheffield S1 4HS

Date Received 14/08/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent Mr Rufus Salter

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act.

2 Within 2 months of the date of this consent the scheme of sound attenuation works described in the noise report produced by ANC Acoustics, dated 25th September 2009 (sections ‘control of noise breakout’ and ‘control of structural borne sound’) shall have been installed in the building as specified in the report, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These works shall be thereafter retained and be capable of restricting noise breakout from amplified or live music within the building when measured on the footpath outside the premises on Charter Square to levels that do not exceed:

(a) background noise levels by more than 3 dBA when measured as a 15 minute LAeq and (b) any octave band centre frequency by more than 3 dB when measured as a 15 minute Leq.

In the interests of the amenities of occupiers of adjoining property.

3 The existing windows and frames to the shop front shall be retained and the sound insulation works to these glazed areas shall be constructed on the inside of the existing windows and frames, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of the visual amenities of the locality.

101

4 Within 2 months of the date of this consent the measures to facilitate disabled access as shown on drawing numbers 002 Rev D, 003 Rev C, e- mail of 13.10.09, and the access component of the design and access statement, shall be implemented and thereafter permanently retained, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

To ensure ease of access and facilities for disabled persons at all times.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

S3 - Development in the Central Shopping Core S10 - Conditions on Development in Shopping Areas

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. The applicant is advised to contact Eric Wilson on 2736168 to progress amendments to the traffic regulation orders adjoining the site in order to provide improved taxi facilities adjacent to the site which are considered to be necessary to serve the development.

102 Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application site consists of a former shop located below the Grosvenor Hotel, which faces on to Charter Square. The change of use is for the ground floor area of the premises, which has an area of approximately 290 sqm. There are retail units to the south with the entrance to the Grosvenor Hotel, retail units and a takeaway to the north. There are offices and storage at first floor level, which will be used in connected with the nightclub. Above this there are two floors of parking associated with the hotel and hotel accommodation on the upper floors. Debenhams department store is located to the south on the opposite side of Furnival Square and to the east there are two nightclubs and car park, below telephone house. There is a further nightclub located in the same block at the junction of Wellington Street and Cambridge Street.

The club will include a bar, seating, toilets, dance floor, DJ booth and cloakroom. The pedestrian entrance is off Charter Square. The operating hours are intended to be 8pm until 5am on weekdays and Sundays and 8pm to 8am on Saturdays.

103

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The application site lies within the boundary of the Retail Quarter mixed development scheme and the building is due to be demolished as part of this development, planning permission 05/03933/OUT.

Several planning permissions were granted for use of the building as a restaurant and nightclub in the early 1990s, planning permissions 93/01892/FUL, 92/01923/FUL, 91/01646/FUL. These consents included a condition that the building shall be used solely for the purpose permitted.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Policy Issues

The application site lies in the Central shopping Area. Unitary Development Plan Policy S3 states that shops, offices, food and drink outlets and housing are preferred uses. Leisure and recreation facilities (D2) are acceptable. At the time this policy was drafted, nightclubs were classed as (D2) uses. The government has subsequently redefined nightclubs into a separate class along with theatres. Therefore a nightclub should be considered to be an acceptable use.

Policy S10 states that changes of use should not prejudice the dominance of preferred uses. Schemes should not result in residents, or visitors to hotels, having to suffer unacceptable living conditions. New development should be served by adequate transport facilities and have access to appropriate off street parking.

The last use of the premises appears to have been as a restaurant, which is a preferred use. Prior to this it was used as a cinema, which is an acceptable use. It should also be noted that the property has been vacant for some time and any use is likely to be temporary, pending the redevelopment of the site. As this is a small property, a change of use to an acceptable use will not prejudice the overall balance of preferred uses across the Central Area shopping policy area. There are also a significant number vacant shop units within the same block, and therefore it is advantageous to have this building brought back into a productive use.

Amenity Issues

The nearest noise sensitive use is the Grosvenor Hotel, which has recently closed down. There is a limited risk that it could be brought back into use by another operator or as a hotel/hostel, without planning permission. The applicants have submitted a noise survey which includes recommendations to prevent noise disturbance to the sensitive rooms in the hotel, and noise break out to the street. The Councils Environment Protection Service considers that provided the noise

104 attenuation measures are implemented, as specified in the proposed condition, there should be no significant noise problems.

The Grosvenor Hotel is the only noise sensitive property near the site, it is not expected that street noise should be a particular concern on this site. Therefore there is considered to be no strong case for limiting the opening hours for this nightclub.

Access Issues

The application site is in the heart of the city centre and consequent access to public transport is good. There are numerous public car parks near the site that will cater for those that drive to the site. There is a high demand for taxis at Nightclubs, and there is a service lay-by and taxi parking facilities directly in front of the site. Alterations to the taxi rank and servicing lay-by would allow it to cater for more taxis and also ensure it is better located to serve the club. This will require alterations to the traffic regulation orders, which the applicant has agreed to fund.

The footpath along the site frontage slopes steeply from north to south. The building has a double door entrance on to a lobby and these doors will be open during operating hours. The floor level adjacent to the northern door leaf is level with the pavement, and therefore disabled people will be able to access the building. Although the premises have two floor levels, disabled people will have access to all the facilities, as these will be available in the main room which is accessible from the entrance. Disabled toilets to meet current design standards will be provided.

Visual Impact

The appearance of the premise remains largely unaltered. The shop front and surrounding masonry has been painted black and windows have been blacked out at the rear. The existing unit is of no great architectural merit and these alterations are considered to be acceptable.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The proposed use is considered to be acceptable in policy terms. Given the limited number of noise sensitive properties near the site, and provided the noise attenuation measures are implemented, there should be no significant amenity impact. The site is well served by transport facilities and there are plenty of public car parks nearby to meet the development’s parking needs. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted.

105

Case Number 09/02493/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Erection of foodstore with associated car parking, landscaping and pedestrian linkage enhancements

Location Land Adjacent Damons Sevenairs Road Sheffield

Date Received 03/08/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent Planning Potential (London)

Recommendation Refuse

For the following reason(s):

1 The proposal is considered to be contrary to Planning Policy Statement 6 in that there is a sequentially preferable, edge of centre site, at the west end of Crystal Peaks shopping centre, which should be developed in advance of the application site. In addition the proposal would put at risk the planned investment strategy of the Waterthorpe Greenway scheme, which is needed to safeguard and enhance the vitality and viability of Crystal Peaks district shopping centre and secure public transport benefits. It would thereby undermine the strategy for Crystal Peaks as set out in Core Strategy Policy CS13.

106 Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application site is located at the junction of Eckington Way and Sevenairs Road to the north or Crystal Peaks district centre. The site is occupied by a single storey restaurant, (Damon’s) and associated car park of approximately 140 spaces. It has an open character as the restaurant only occupies the eastern corner closest to the roundabout. The southern quarter of the site is ancillary landscaping to the restaurant and is laid out as a lawn. A public footpath runs along the eastern boundary of the site, it links the residential areas to the north and east, along with the Beighton Community Hospital, with Crystal Peaks shopping centre. The site falls from north to south by approximately 6m and from west to east by approximately 2m.

To the north of the site there is Beighton Community Hospital, to the east a housing estate, and to the south and west a freestanding restaurant and Crystal Peaks district centre. The gardens of some of the houses to the east directly abut the application site. Towards the southern end to the site there is a signal

107 controlled pedestrian crossing of Eckington Way with adjoining footpath connections into the district shopping centre.

The application proposals retain the existing restaurant and propose the erection of an Aldi supermarket on part of the existing car park and landscaping. The new store would be located close to the southern boundary with Eckington Way. It would be a single storey building of approximately 1350 sqm with a sales area of 1000 sqm. The main building is rectangular shaped with the back of house storage and ancillary facilities tacked on to the east side of the building. The entrance to the store faces the entrance to the Damon’s restaurant and the loading bay is located on the east side of the building. Vehicles will access the site via the existing Damon’s access off Sevenairs Road, and the layout of part of the existing car park is to be modified. A pedestrian access is to be provided off Eckington Way and also off Violet Avenue, through the car park to the store entrance. The southern part of the site and part of the eastern boundary will be graded up and landscaped to meet the raised floor level of the building.

The main store is faced in render which is divided into panels by a series of brick piers. It has a brick plinth and a brick faced southern elevation. The entrance to the store and first two bays are faced in a dark grey powder coated aluminium glazing system. The parapet to the entrance area is raised so that there is a step in the elevation between the entrance area and the main store. The back of house area is faced in brickwork and is lower than the main building. The south facing elevation and eastern most part of the ‘back of house’ area will incorporate a wire system to encourage climbing plants to green the elevations.

The store would provide 25-30 local jobs and additional employment during the construction phase.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

Planning permission was granted for the erection of a restaurant with parking in February 1995, 94/01837/FUL. This is the detailed permission for Damon’s restaurant.

Outline planning permission was granted in October 1990 for the erection of a licensed restaurant, bar and 40 bedroom Travelodge and provision of car parking accommodation, 90/02631/OUT.

Outline planning permission was granted in June 1990 of the erection of a licensed restaurant and Travelodge and provision of parking accommodation, 90/01362/OUT.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

29 neighbours have made representations in support of the scheme. The most number of representations in favour of the scheme are from residents living on Lilac Road (8), Aster Close (3), and Sevenairs Road (3). The main grounds for supporting the scheme are;

108 - Convenience, accessible to people who do not have use of a car, can make linked trips with Crystal Peaks, reduces the need to travel to Aldi Stores elsewhere for shopping. - Value for money shopping which is important for people on low incomes, particularly pensioners. - Increases shopping choice and provides competition for Sainsbury’s and Morrisons. - Store will create employment. - Damon’s car park is empty most of the day when people shop, there will be no significant impact on traffic, and there are difficulties in parking at Crystal Peaks. - The scheme will have little impact on green space. - Disruption will not be great as there is already a restaurant on the site. - The scheme has been amended to take into account objections.

Damon’s have made comments in support of the application. They have advised that they are happy with the design, layout, access and parking arrangements. They advise that they are comfortable with the shared parking arrangements and these are more than adequate to meet Damon’s needs, including at busy times.

70 Representations have been received opposing the scheme, five of which are from individuals who have responded more than once. The objectors include Clive Betts MP, and local Councillors, Mirfin-Boukouris, Saunders, and Rosling-Josephs. Beighton Villages Development Trust also objected to the proposal. The most number of representations against the scheme were from residents living on, Aster Close (7), Sevenairs Road (6), and Drakehouse Lane West (6). The main grounds for objecting to the scheme are listed below.

A number of those objecting to the scheme have said they are not against an Aldi store in the Crystal Peaks area, but they consider that the site next to Damon’s is not suitable, for the reasons which have been summarised below.

Traffic, Parking, Access

The highways around the site, particularly Eckington Way, Drakehouse Lane, Waterthorpe Greenway and Ochre Dyke are gridlocked at peak times and all weekend. Residents of Beckton Ave, Watkinson Gardens, Nathan Drive already have difficulty accessing their homes at peak times. The Aldi scheme will worsen this congestion. Some residents feel that increased congestion caused by an Aldi store would lead to people detouring through Beigton Village to avoid the congestion. The additional use of the Eckington Way pedestrian crossing by store customers will result in delays to the Eckington Way traffic.

Damon’s car park is already full in the evenings and at weekends and especially in summer, term time breaks, bank holidays and when they have special offers. As a result parking will overspill on to surrounding residential streets. The lack of parking is likely to lead to staff being told to park off site. There is criticism of the parking surveys carried out by the applicant. It is argued that the June survey was carried out when the weather was good and on a weekend when England football team were playing an international, and that this will have reduced the number of

109 customers visiting the restaurant. Residents have provided information that the car park was full at 7pm on 21st Sept, that there were only 22 spaces available between 5.20-5.45 pm on 14th Sept, and only 27 spaces available at 7.30pm on 16th Sept.

There are already parking problems in the estate roads surrounding the site which cause access difficulties for buses, refuse collection and emergency vehicles. Staff from Crystal Peaks, and visitors and workers from Beigton Community Hospital already park on Sevenairs Road and Drakehouse Lane West. It is argued that an Aldi store will worsen these problems.

The parking on both sides of Sevenairs Road will compromise the safety of the site access. This road is already busy and will be made busier by the improvements taking place at Beighton Community Hospital. The access roads serving the site and the site access are unsuitable for articulated vehicles. Vehicular access from Sevenairs Road on to the Eckington Road roundabout is already difficult, and will be made worse by the Aldi proposal.

The site is not well served by public transport and it is a long way from the bus interchange and the tram stop. Linked trips would not occur and people would drive between Crystal peaks and the site. Virtually all visitors will travel to the site by car.

Delivery vehicles will have to reverse across a pedestrian area, which is unsafe.

The proposed extension to the Violet Avenue footpath will result in the loss of trees that help to reduce noise and overlooking of adjacent residential properties. The gradient of the footpath will be too steep. An alternative footpath should be extended off the opposite side of the Violet Avenue turning head.

Alterations should be made to the Eckington Way/Drakehouse Lane roundabout to help mitigate the traffic impact from the development. Parking restrictions are needed to keep the entrance clear on Sevenairs Road and to prevent inconsiderate parking at bends, junctions and accesses.

Need and Impact

Crystal Peaks, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons satisfactorily cater for shopping need and also offer low cost products; therefore there is no need for the proposal. There are other Aldi stores that people can drive to.

The need can be met on the Waterthorpe site next to the bus interchange. There is insufficient demand for two discount retailers if the site next to the interchange is also developed.

The scheme will harm local shops and small units in the Market Place at Crystal Peaks.

110 Alternative sites, Sequential approach

The proposal should be directed to a town centre site and consequently it is contrary to planning policy. Aldi should use empty units in Crystal Peaks or the retail park where development would support these centres. These sites are better served by public transport/parking facilities, and deliveries will not impact on residents. Aldi should be able to knock two units together to create sufficient space.

Aldi should develop the Waterthorpe site, which is more accessible by public transport and is better for disabled access. There are also no major roads to cross to get to Crystal Peaks. The proposal therefore fails the sequential approach. The Waterthorpe scheme is only viable if supported by a discount retailer, this scheme and the associated public transport improvements will be put at risk by the Aldi scheme.

Aldi should be directed to the Greenfield site behind Homebase.

Amenity Impact

The development is too close to residential properties, it is 14m from residential property boundaries. It will have a harmful impact on residential amenity due to, noise and vibration caused by deliveries; the overbearing impact of the building; overlooking and loss of privacy; blocking views and the unattractive elevation facing neighbours; noise and dust during construction; impact of waste storage and vermin, and light pollution. It will attract anti social behaviour and the associated noise and litter, which will be exacerbated by the sale of cheap alcohol. There is already a lot of noise from Damon’s.

Other Aldis’ appear run down. The pollution noise and carbon emissions will be detrimental to the health and well being of residents and they will have a harmful impact on the hospice.

The shrub planting will make the path across the site unsafe.

Visual Impact

The design and materials are out of keeping and will harm the appearance of the area.

Impact on green space

The loss of the green space is contrary to Policy LR8, which says development will not be permitted where it is a well used and high quality facility. The green space is used by children playing and creates a buffer between the housing and the road. It is well maintained and valued by local residents, and important for wildlife and human health. It is a small pocket of green space in an area where many green spaces have been developed, and its development will make the area appear more built up and less spacious.

111 Policy

The land is earmarked for housing, and the development is a departure from policy.

Other Issues

Aldi do not source food locally and this increases the environmental impact.

The presence of a building on the site may affect Beighton’s success in the Britain in Bloom competition.

It will have a harmful impact on Damon’s custom; it will bring down the tone of the area and will result in a reduction in property values.

These are all non planning issues.

Other Objections

An objection has been received from Albany Courtyard Investments Limited, the owners of Crystal Peaks Shopping Centre, and the promoters of a mixed development scheme on the Waterthorpe site, to the West of Crystal Peaks. Phase 1 of this scheme, which is the subject of pre-application discussions, includes a transport interchange, two small retail stores, one of which is a convenience store. The new interchange will provide an upgraded tram platform, and an improved bus station, which will be relocated next to the tram stop. They have objected on the grounds that they consider the application is premature until the outcome of the Council’s new retail study is known, which will assess current and future retail capacity in the area. They consider the Waterthorpe development will be a natural extension to the shopping centre and the transport interchange element of the scheme is consistent with the Core Strategy strategic transport objectives. They argue that the food store element of the Waterthorpe scheme will be better connected to the shopping centre and the transport interchange than the Damon’s site. They also consider that the Damon’s site is close to residential property, which raises amenity concerns. They conclude that the Damon’s site does not form an acceptable site in sequential terms. They argue that the sale of land to the food store operator is critical to the delivery of the transport interchange in the Waterthorpe scheme, and it has not been possible to identify any alternative source of funding to bridge the funding gap. They anticipate that phase 1 of the scheme will be on site in the next 3 years, and point out that the covenant restricting food operators above 500 sqm from using the former Sainsbury’s unit in Crystal Peaks has now expired.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Policy Issues

Unitary Development Plan

112 The application site lies in a housing policy area. Housing is the preferred use, and shops exceeding 280 sqm sales area are unacceptable unless at the edge of a District Shopping Centre. This is defined as a location within easy walking distance, (i.e. 200-300 metres) of the primary shopping area and providing parking facilities that serve the centre as well as the store, thus enabling one trip to serve several purposes.

Planning Policy Statement 6 “Planning for Town Centres” defines edge of centre as being within up to 300m of the primary shopping area. Local topography should be taken into account and barriers such as crossing major roads and car parks. The attractiveness and perceived safety of the route and the strength of attraction and size of the town centre are considerations. A site should not be considered to be well connected where separated by a barrier such as a major road, and there is no existing or proposed pedestrian route that provides safe and convenient access.

In this case the distance from the store to the entrance of the shopping centre is approximately 200m; it is approximately 100m from the store entrance to the edge of the district centre boundary. There are segregated pedestrian routes between the site and the shopping centre and a pedestrian signalised crossing of Eckington Way. Whilst there is a change in level this would not be considered to be significant by most people. It can be concluded that there is a safe and convenient route between the site and the shopping centre and the site can be considered to be an edge of centre site. Therefore the proposal is not contrary to the Unitary Development Plan policy.

The application site is not defined as open space in the Unitary Development Plan. Policy LR8 applies to small areas of public or private open space which are not shown as open space on the proposals map. It states that development will not be permitted where it would involve the loss of recreational space. Recreational space is defined in the policy as formal and informal recreation space but excludes areas associated with buildings where the public use for recreation is limited.

In this case, the majority of the site as a whole is occupied by the restaurant and car parking areas. The southern part of the site includes an area of short mown grass of approximately 1650 sqm. This area of land is associated with the restaurant building and provides a setting for the building. Whilst residents have said that that children play on this area, the recreation use is considered to be limited, and it mainly provides a pleasant setting for the building and footpath which skirt the edge of the site. Therefore it is concluded that it should not be regarded as recreational space and Policy LR8 does not apply.

Retail issues

Aldi is a discount food retailer. The net sales area of the store is 1000 sqm, 80% of which will be for convenience goods, everyday essential items, including food, drinks and confectionery. Stores stock a limited number of lines of mainly own branded goods. They do not stock newspapers, magazines or cigarettes and sell a limited range of own branded confectionary. They have a small range of own branded wine and spirits and a limited range of milk and bread lines. They do not sell loose fruit and vegetables and do not include meat, fish, delicatessen, chemist

113 or bakery counters. The do not provide a one stop shop, because of the limited range of goods sold.

Retail Policy

Core Strategy Policy CS13 states that shopping provision at Crystal Peaks will be maintained at around its current capacity. The commentary on this policy states that forecasts show that the existing District Centre is large enough to meet the area’s needs over the plan period.

This policy seeks to maintain and selectively improve public transport services. The commentary to this policy states that improvements by 2016 are expected to include improvements to the Crystal Peaks interchange, possibly complemented by extra park-and-ride facilities.

Planning Policy Statement 6 “Planning for Town Centres” provides national planning guidance for retail development. It post-dates and supersedes UDP retail policies. A key objective is to promote and enhance existing centres, by focusing development in town centres and encouraging a wide range of services. Where a development proposal is submitted on an edge of centre site applicants have to consider the need for the development, the scale of the development, whether there are sequentially preferable sites available in existing centres, the impact of the development on existing centres and the accessibility of the location proposed.

Need for the development

Quantitative Need – Convenience Goods

A quantitative need would be demonstrated if the amount of future spending in the catchment area exceeded the amount of floorspace available to accommodate it. The applicants have attempted to show this.

They anticipate that the Aldi store will have a convenience turnover of £3.5m by the time it would open - 2014. The applicants have defined its catchment area as a five minutes drive time, as it is expected to draw 90% of its trade from within this area.

The applicant’s calculations show that people living in this area will spend £39 million on convenience goods and, assuming that existing stores traded at the company average, there will be enough floorspace to accommodate £50m of convenience goods spending. Most of this floorspace is at Crystal Peaks. This appears to demonstrate a surplus of floorspace. The justification for CS13 states that Crystal Peaks is large enough to meet the area’s need over the plan period.

However this apparent surplus can be modified to allow for inflows and outflows of spending to and from the Aldi catchment area. Currently it is estimated that about 60% of stores’ turnover comes from people living outside the catchment area and allowing for this inflow would mean that there is floorspace left to accommodate only £19m of spending from people living within it. Outflows of residents’ spending,

114 to stores such as Asda and Morrisons, are allowed for too, and the applicants have taken a range of possible outflows varying between 15% and 30%. An outflow of 30% (£12m) would still provide a surplus of spending over floorspace capacity of about £7m. This would be enough to support two stores such as Aldi. There would then be capacity for further floorspace. However, Aldi’s turnover is small relative to total spending and turnover, and small changes in assumptions about what inflows and outflows to allow for make large differences to calculations of capacity.

Quantitative Need - Comparison Goods

20% of Aldi’s floorspace will be available for comparison goods. Based on the store trading at full company averages this represents £873,000 turnover. At 2014 there is predicted to be £13 m growth in comparison goods spending within the catchment area. This would leave a surplus of £12 m from growth alone.

This analysis demonstrates capacity for additional comparison goods floorspace within the catchment area.

Qualitative need

The nearest discount convenience retail outlet is the Lidl store at Alison Crescent which is 3.6 miles away. The proposed store will therefore enhance local choice and reduce social exclusion by allowing local people who do not have access to a car to access a discount food store. It is also argued that the development of the site will result in the more efficient use of land which will result in a more sustainable pattern of development.

Sequential Approach

As the application site is an edge of centre site, it is necessary to consider if there are any other sequentially preferable sites available within the catchment area. Planning Policy Guidance Note 6 ‘Planning for Town Centres’ requires in centre sites to be considered first, followed by alternative edge of centre sites. An alternative site should only be considered if it suitable, viable, and available in a reasonable period of time.

Crystal Peaks Shopping Centre

At the time of the assessment, the only available vacant units were located in the former Sainsbury’s. The applicants argue that these are not suitable as the floorspace is spread over two floors and no single unit is large enough. They consider spreading trading over two floors is not conducive to an efficient trading operation. Whilst they have considered combining the floorspace of two units on one level, it is felt that this could leave floor space that is too small for, or unattractive to other non convenience good traders. In addition delivery arrangements to these units are shared with adjacent units and it is difficult to accommodate service docking arrangements ordinarily used by Aldi.

They also point out that there is a restrictive covenant on Crystal Peaks District Centre that restricts food operators of above 500 sqm, such as Aldi.

115

It is accepted that the configuration and arrangement of vacant units in Crystal Peaks and the difficulty of accommodating Aldi’s normal delivery arrangements would represent an unreasonable restriction to Aldi’s trading format.

Whilst there was a restrictive covenant on the former Sainsbury’s unit this expired in May 2009. It is also noted that there is a restrictive covenant on the Damon’s site, although the applicant is confident that they can get this removed.

Drakehouse Retail Park

The applicants identified unit 6 as being vacant at Drakehouse Retail Park. This unit is more than 300m from the edge of the District Shopping Centre boundary and at least 650m from Crystal Peaks, there are also level differences between the site and Crystal Peaks. In planning terms this site qualifies as an out of centre site, which means it is less preferable than the edge of centre Demon’s site in policy terms. It is further from Crystal Peaks and there are more barriers to movement between the two sites. Given this it is unlikely that the Drakehouse site would support the district shopping centre, although there would be the potential for linked trips with the retail park.

West End of Crystal Peaks

A mixed development proposal is being formulated for land to the west of Peaks Mount at the west end of the shopping centre. This will incorporate an integrated bus and tram interchange, park and ride, a discount food retailer, later phases may comprise of a mixed development of offices and leisure uses. Whilst discussions have been underway for some time a planning application has not been submitted yet. The discount food development is considered to critical in securing the investment in the interchange and park and ride facility.

Availability

The applicants have argued that there are doubts over the availability of the site as no application has been submitted and the funding agreements are not in place. However the site is owned by the Council and the Cabinet has agreed to release this land to Hermes, the owners of Crystal Peaks, following a cabinet report in Sept 2009. The promoters of this scheme have advised that they intend to be on site with phase 1, which will include the interchange and food discount store in the next 3 years. Therefore the site is clearly available for development in a relatively short period of time.

Suitability

The applicants have argued that development plan policies do not support the site as being suitable for a discount retailer. They point out that it lies within a Business Institution: Leisure Area in the Unitary Development Plan, where shops with a sales area of more than 280 sqm are considered to be unacceptable uses, Policy LR3. They also argue that policy CS3 of the Core Strategy promotes offices

116 around the Crystal Peaks transport interchange. They also point out that the site is Greenfield land whilst the Aldi site adjoining Damon’s is brownfield land.

Whilst the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) appears to preclude a retail store on the Waterthorpe site, it should be noted that the Retail policies in the UDP are largely out of date and have been superseded by Planning Policy Statement 6. This seeks to direct retail development to town centre sites first, followed by edge of centre sites. As the site is within 200m to the entrance of Crystal Peaks with no major roads to cross and close to the bus interchange and tram stop, it is clearly an edge of centre site. Whilst the Core Strategy policy promotes offices close to the interchange it does not preclude other uses and therefore is not an impediment to retail development that occupies a small part of the area. It is therefore concluded that there are no significant planning polices that make the Waterthorpe site unsuitable.

Viability

There are some uncertainties about the funding of the Waterthorpe public transport interchange scheme which requires gap funding from SYPTE and from a food discount store and Hermes. However a coherent plan appears to be in place to bridge this gap. A retail operator appears to be willing to develop a discount food store on the site, which suggests that it is suitable from a commercial point of view.

Conclusion on Sequential sites

It is accepted that there are no sequentially preferable sites within the existing shopping centre or on the retail parks adjoining Crystal Peaks. However the Waterthorpe site needs to be considered more carefully as it is also an edge of centre site that seems to satisfy the availability, suitability and viability criteria.

PPS 6 says that when considering alternative sites, preference should be given to sites that are or will be better connected to the centre. The distance from Crystal Peaks to the store entrance of the Aldi store is 5 metres further than the distance to the store on the Waterthorpe site. However, a major road has to be crossed to reach the Aldi site, whereas the Waterthorpe site is likely to be connected to the centre via pedestrian routes which do not require roads to be crossed.

The Aldi site is served by a larger walk in catchment. Approximately 1600 people are within 500m of the site as opposed to approximately 800 people for the Waterthorpe site. However the Waterthorpe site will be right next to the bus interchange and a tram stop and therefore will be much better served by public transport. The applicants have produced evidence to show that more people tend to walk rather than travel by public transport to do their food shopping and similar sized stores. However, it is not clear whether the evidence comes from comparable sites, which have a bus interchange and tram stop right next to the proposed store, as will be the case with the Waterthorpe site. Given this there is some doubt as to whether the Damon’s site would cater for more non-car based customers as suggested by the applicant, or how significant any difference might be. However the potential for linked trips is considered to be much greater for the Waterthorpe site as a future store will clearly be visible from a main entrance to the

117 mall, unlike the Demon’s site, which is also located across a busy road. The parking on the Waterthorpe site is also likely to be considered as part of the District Centre parking, which is not likely to be the case with parking on the Damon’s site. Therefore it is concluded that the Waterthorpe site is sequentially preferable as it will be better connected to the Crystal Peaks and is more likely to support the centre than the Damon’s site.

Impact

For edge of centre sites it is necessary to consider the impact of the development on existing town centres and also on any future public or private investment needed to safeguard the vitality and viability of the centre.

There is no similar type of discount food operator in Crystal Peaks and therefore the development is unlikely to a have a significant impact on drawing trade and undermining the vitality of the District Centre as a whole.

An Aldi would however have a positive impact on clawing back trade from those customers that travel elsewhere for discount food shopping, and also encouraging linked trips with Crystal Peaks.

The Waterthorpe scheme, at the west end of Crystal Peaks, is a planned investment scheme that will provide a new transport interchange, which will address problems of lack of integration of the bus/tram, poor quality facilities at the bus interchange (including facilities that are not DDA compliant), and capacity issues. Later phases of the Waterthorpe development will also bring forward employment development which will support the District Centre. This scheme is important investment needed to enhance and maintain the vitality and viability of the Crystal Peaks Shopping Centre and meet the transport needs of the area. It is therefore necessary to consider the impact that the Aldi scheme may have on this investment.

The applicant has argued that the impact of the Aldi scheme on the Waterthorpe development should be given no weight as the provision of a new transport interchange is not required by any adopted planning document. They also consider that there is no certainty that the Waterthorpe scheme will come forward. They have produced evidence from other sites where two discount retailers are able to successfully trade in close proximity to each other some where the catchment population is smaller than that of the Crystal Peaks site. They consider that there is no evidence base to suggest why a discount food operator is the only use of the land that would make the scheme viable. They suggest that the Council may be favouring the Waterthorpe site on Corporate rather than planning grounds.

However the policy section above explains that it is an objective or the approved Core Strategy to secure improvements to the Crystal Peaks Transport Interchange. The Sept 2009 cabinet report explains that the inclusion of a discount food retail store is essential to bridge the financial gap to make the overall Waterthorpe development viable. Hermes, who are promoting the scheme, have stated that it has not been possible to identify any other sources of funding that will bridge this financial gap, if the food discount store were to withdraw from the scheme. The

118 potential operator of this food discount store has confirmed that consent for a food discount store on the Damon’s site would severely compromise the viability of their store in such close proximity. They have suggested that the strength of catchment for customers could be adversely affected to the extent where the store would not be viable commercially. This would lead them to consider whether they would significantly reduce their contribution to the value of the funding to the interchange or alternatively withdrawing their offer completely. Hermes has confirmed that if this occurred the overall scheme would be unviable. It is concluded that if an Aldi store were permitted on the Damon’s site there is a significant risk that it would prejudice the Waterthorpe Scheme, which is important for the vitality and viability of the District Centre and meeting the transport needs of the area.

The application fails the PPS6 tests of impact given at Para 3.22 because it would ‘put at risk the spatial planning strategy for the area and the strategy for a particular centre’ and ‘the likely effect on future public or private sector investment needed to safeguard the vitality and viability of the centre or centres’

Although the replacement for PPS6 - PPS4 (draft) - is not yet Government policy, it is likely to restate the need to refuse applications that impact on ‘existing, committed and planned public and private investment in a centre or centres in the catchment area of the proposal.’ Other impacts to be considered include the effect of the proposal on promoting linked trips with existing centres.

Scale

PPS 6 advises that the scale of retail development should relate to the role and function of the centre within the wider catchment. Crystal Peaks functions as a District Shopping Centre, which would be expected to meet the convenience goods shopping needs of the local population. The five minute drive time catchment area is local to the site and the scale of store proposed is therefore considered to be appropriate to the role and function of Crystal Peaks.

Accessibility

PPS 6 advises that Local Planning Authorities should consider whether the site will be accessible and well served by a choice of means of transport, especially public transport, walking and cycling as well as by car. The impact of car use on traffic and congestion should also be considered.

The access issues are dealt with in more detail below, where it is concluded that the site is accessible by a choice of means of transport and the impact on traffic congestion will be negligible.

Other Relevant Matters

The applicant has argued that the Aldi development will take place on Brownfield Land as opposed to a Waterthorpe site which is a Greenfield site. It is correct that the Damon’s site is classified as Brownfield Land. However it is not in need regeneration or remediation and is contributing positively to the character of the

119 area. Therefore the more intensive development of this Brownfield site should be given little weight in determining this application.

Access Issues

National planning guidance on transport issues is set in Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 ‘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.

The Council’s latest interim parking guidelines, which are to be interpreted as maximum standards, state that up to one space per 20 sqm of floor space can be provided to serve food retail developments. This would mean that up to 68 parking spaces could be provided. The parking guidelines in the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Plan – Regional Spatial Strategy to 2026 state that for food retail development the maximum parking provision should be 1 space per 18-25sqm of floor space.

The development will utilise the existing access off Sevenairs Road. There are currently 140 parking spaces available on the site and this number would be reduced to 120 on the completion of the development. These will be shared by Damon’s restaurant and the proposed Aldi Store. There will be 7 accessible spaces, 8 child/parent spaces and 10 cycle spaces. Servicing will take the form of one articulated vehicle delivery per day and one separate delivery each day of fresh bread and milk.

The proposed store has good footpath connections to the residential areas to the east and north of the site. As a result there is a high potential for customers to walk to the site. The applicants are proposing to create an improved footpath connection from the site to Violet Avenue. This will replace the un-surfaced stepped link between the Violet Avenue turning head and the footpath that runs along the east edge of the site. A direct footpath link is also being created from the eastern site perimeter footpath to the store entrance, through the car park. These along with existing footpath connections to the adjacent residential areas will ensure that the proposed store is easily accessible by foot.

The store entrance is approximately 200m walking distance from the East Mall entrance to Crystal Peaks Shopping Centre. There is a pelican crossing adjacent to the site which allows for safe crossing of Eckington Way. Given this and the distance between the proposed store and Crystal Peaks it can be expected that some customers will make linked trips.

Public transport services can be accessed at the Crystal Peaks bus interchange by a covered route through the shopping centre and also at the Beighton/ Drakehouse Lane Supertram stop. These are approximately 500m and 300m walking distance respectively from the site. The route to the tram stop passes through the shopping centre car parks and involves crossing the shopping centre service roads; there is also a fairly significant level difference between the stop and the site. Whilst there

120 are no bus stops next to the site there are bus services stopping at Skelton Land/Lilac Road, Drakehouse Lane and Waterthorpe Greenway. It is concluded that whilst access to bus stops and tram stops is not ideal, the site should be considered to be reasonably served by public transport.

There is the potential to cycle to the site particularly through the quieter residential streets to the east and north of the site. The number of cycle stands proposed is in excess of the Council’s guidelines. The applicants have said that changing facilities will be available within the building for staff.

It is considered that the site access and the junction of Sevenairs Road with Eckington Way can adequately accommodate the extra traffic generated by the development. The applicants have agreed to fund traffic regulation orders on Sevenairs Road adjacent to the site entrance to ensure that vehicles can safely access and egress the site. The applicants have also demonstrated that the servicing vehicles can turn within the site and enter and leave in a forward gear. Given the limited number of service vehicle movements, and because servicing is likely to take place either before the store is open, or when there are few customers on site, it is considered that reversing servicing vehicles should not pose a particular safety problem.

The applicants are keen to develop a travel plan to promote sustainable access to the site; ideally this should be linked to the Crystal Peaks District Shopping Centre travel plan. This can be secured by a planning condition.

Parking surveys were undertaken by the applicant to establish the demand for the existing car park by Damon’s. These initially took place between 8am and 8pm on Friday 5th and Saturday 6th of June. The maximum parking accumulation was found to be at 8pm on a Saturday when there were 90 vehicles in the car park and the car park was approximately 65% full.

The applicants have interrogated data from other stores to establish the expected demand for parking from a new food store. This indicates that the maximum parking demand on a weekday is likely to be 36 vehicles and 47 on a Saturday. The maximum demand for the car park from Aldi customers would be in the middle of the day whist the demand from the restaurant is low, until after 4pm. Combining the data from other Aldi sites and the survey data from the restaurant gives the combined parking demand. This shows a maximum demand of 91 spaces on a Saturday and 96 on a Friday which equates to a maximum 82% usage. It is generally accepted that a car park will operate efficiently up to 90% capacity.

Representations form local residents raised concerns that the parking surveys underestimated the level of demand when special promotions are available at the restaurant. As a result, the applicant was asked to undertake further surveys. These took place on Friday 25th Sept, Saturday 26th, Tuesday 29th and Thursday 1st of October. The weekday surveys were between 5pm and 8pm and the Saturday survey took place between 1pm and 6pm. During these periods special offers were available.

121 The Friday 25th survey recorded a higher peak utilisation of the car park at 8pm a total of 93 vehicles were parking in the car park. When combined with the predicted accumulation for an Aldi store the peak accumulation is at 7pm when 105 vehicles are potentially parked in the car park. This equates to 88% of the revised capacity of the car park. The Saturday accumulation figures were less than those predicted using the 6th June survey data.

The highway officer has made his own checks on site to verify the level of car park usage, given the conflicting information provided by the applicant and residents. These visits confirmed that the car park occupancy is very much in line with the figures provided by the applicant’s consultants. It is therefore concluded that the reduced car park provision can adequately accommodate both the demand from the restaurant and the proposed Aldi store. It should however be anticipated that on a limited number of occasions capacity may be exceeded and some overspill onto Sevenairs Road will take place. It is considered that additional parking on Sevenairs Road can be safely accommodated, provided its location is controlled. This should be possible as the developer has accepted the cost of promoting and installing a Traffic Regulation Order for Sevenairs Road to control parking. Any shortfall in parking would have the greatest impact on the operation of Damon’s, and they have confirmed that they are satisfied with the revised parking proposals. A condition could require the submission of a strategy for managing parking during construction to minimise the impact on the adjoining residential areas.

The impact of traffic on the highway has been assessed by considering the number of trips generated in the peak period. In the morning peak 18 additional trips are expected, in the evening peak this increases to 107 additional trips and in the Saturday peak (11.00-12.00) the number is 174. Studies show that most trips to new food shops are transferring from other similar stores, diverting from other trips or already passing the site. Therefore stores result in a change in travel patterns. Taking this into account there are expect to be 85 new trips on this part of the highway network during the evening peak and 156 during the Saturday peak. The junction analysis shows that this would not have a significant impact on the operation of the Eckington Way/Waterthorpe Greenway/Sevenairs Road junction. With regards to the traffic impact, it should be noted that the Transport Assessment figures are considered to be a worst case assessment, and in reality some element of linked trips is likely to take place, which would reduce predicted traffic levels further.

Residents have raised a concern about the development worsening congestion on the highway network which is particularly acute with long queues forming on Eckington Way. It is considered that the critical junction that causes the queues to form is the Eckington Way/Drakehouse Lane/Crystal Peaks junction. The worst queues occur on Fridays. As traffic from an Aldi store would disperse in various directions from the Eckington Way/Waterthorpe Greenway/Sevenairs Road junction, only a relatively small number of vehicles would pass through the Crystal Peaks junction. These proposals would result in an extra 6 trips in the morning peak and 38 trips in the evening peak passing through this junction, which is not considered to be material. Therefore this scheme should not add materially to existing traffic congestion, and there is considered to be insufficient basis for requiring the developer to contribute to junction improvements.

122

Amenity Impact

Unitary Development Plan policy H14, ‘Conditions on Development in Housing Areas’ states that sites should not be over-developed or deprive residents of light, privacy or security. Non-housing uses should not lead to air pollution, noise, smell, excessive traffic levels or other nuisance or risk to health and safety for people living nearby. It should also be on a scale consistent with the residential character of the area or meet primarily local needs.

This section considers the impact of the development on the amenities of the immediate residential neighbours. Of particular significance is the potential for noise impact and whether the building will result in overshadowing/loss of light or appear overbearing.

The residents most likely to be affected by these issues adjoin the eastern site boundary. The rear/side gardens of residential properties on Aster Close and Drake House Lane West adjoin the site and some properties on Violet Avenue face towards the site.

A noise assessment has been carried out to assess the impact of noise during food deliveries and from mechanical plant.

The opening hours of the store are proposed to be; - 9am -7pm Mon to Wed. - 9am – 8pm Thur and Fri. - 8.30am- 6pm on Sat. - 8am – 4pm on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

The applicant is willing to restrict the delivery hours to the following; - 8am – 9pm Mon to Sat - 9am – 6pm Sundays and Bank Holidays.

Deliveries will consist of one articulated vehicle per day and one delivery each of fresh milk and bread. The service bay is located on the east side of the building which faces the nearest residential properties on Aster Close. Following negotiations at pre-application stage, the delivery area has been moved further away from the residential properties. At the nearest point it is 28m from the rear house wall of No 25 Aster Close. The loading bay is cut into the ground by approximately 1m so that goods can be loaded directly from the back of the vehicle into the building. A 2m high acoustic screen is proposed on the east side of the service bay to screen noise. Aldi has advised that all deliveries take place internally, except some refuse collection. Vehicles reverse up to the building and load directly into a rubber shroud to help contain noise. Aldi have also indicated that reversing alarms will be turned off as customers will not generally be on site when deliveries are being made. Officers have reservations about the safety implications of silencing alarms; however the Environmental Protection Service has confirmed that if complaints arise as a result of the use of these alarms, they would look to Statutory Nuisance powers to resolve any issues.

123 A survey of background noise levels was undertaken to establish the existing noise climate. The noise levels from plant and deliveries have been determined by recording actual noise levels at other operating sites. The noise assessment predictions suggest that the generated noise will be lower than the existing background noise levels. The noise levels inside habitable rooms will within recommended levels. The noise survey therefore concludes that noise associated with deliveries and plant is unlikely to give rise to complaints.

However, the Environmental Protection Service has advised that the assessment may not fully characterise the noise produced by revving engines, delivery noise and waste collections and the applicants have also assumed that reversing bleepers will be switched off. They would therefore wish to see delivery times restricted so that they do not occur before 8am Monday and Saturday and 9am on Sundays, with no deliveries after 11pm. The applicants have agreed to more restricted hours of servicing as listed above. Given this, the fact that servicing takes place largely within the building, and the limited number of deliveries, it is considered that noise should not have a significant impact on residential amenity. There is no reason to believe that vibration during deliveries should be a problem given the separation from residential properties.

At the nearest point the back of the building will be 26m from the rear elevation of houses on Aster Close. At this point residents would be faced with a wall approximately 16m long approximately 1.5m higher than the eaves of an average house. This is the worst relationship between the building and existing housing, as in other areas the building is further away, and angled way from the residential properties.

Cross sections have been supplied to show the relationship between the existing houses and the new store. The outlook for those residents of Aster Close that overlook the site will clearly be worsened as the current open aspect over a car park and mown grass areas will be replaced with a sizable commercial building and associated landscaping. However in the worst case it is considered that the proposed building will not be so overbearing and harmful to their outlook that it justifies refusing planning permission.

Given that the building is located to the west of houses on Aster Close the applicants have been asked to assess the impact on sunlight and overshadowing. 3D views of the site have been produced showing the shadows at 10am, 2pm and 5pm for April, July October and December. The analysis shows that in April the building does not cast any shadows over the residential properties until late afternoon, when the shadows cast are no greater than those cast by existing structures. In July the development does not cast shadows beyond the site boundary. In October the development does not cast shadows over the residential properties in the morning or early afternoon, by 5pm the sun is close to setting and the shadows are scarcely visible approaching dusk. In December the morning daylight is unaffected by the proposal, in the afternoon the shadow of the building is cast on to the garden boundary fence, but this is already casting a shadow over the garden and there is no further effect from the building. At 5pm the sun has already set and therefore there are no shadows visible. It is concluded that the

124 proposal will not have a significant negative impact on natural daylight to the adjacent residential properties.

Overlooking and loss of privacy is not a significant issue. The nearest windows which face towards residential properties are those that form part of the store entrance. These are approximately 55m from the nearest habitable windows, which is well in excess of what is necessary to safeguard privacy. Car parking is no closer to residential properties than it is at present. Car parking close to the rear boundaries of 21, 23, 25 and 34 Aster Close will be replaced by landscaping. The applicants initially proposed to extend a footpath link across the frontage of 15/17 Violet Avenue to connect to the existing footpath that runs along the eastern boundary of the site. The current footpath is not a through route and ends at the front of No 17 Violet Close, and therefore only serves a limited number of dwellings. The residents are concerned that this will adversely affect their privacy and the removal of trees will increase noise disturbance. The applicants have now withdrawn this aspect of the proposal and replaced this link with a less direct route off the end of the Violet Close turning head as described above. Although this is not the most direct route, given residents concerns, it is considered to be a reasonable compromise.

Residents have suggested that the store will be a focus for anti social behaviour with youths hanging around the site. Whilst these concerns are understood, they are more usually associated with corner shops than Supermarkets. In this case there will be good natural surveillance of the building entrance and car park, and new lighting columns will be introduced across the site. A CCTV camera system is also proposed, and the applicant has indicated that the local crime prevention officer will be involved throughout the design process. The Police Architectural Liaison Officer has commented that the issues of safety and security have been addressed at the design stage. He did suggest that boundary treatment might be appropriate along the eastern boundary of the site to reduce the vulnerability of vehicles in the car park. However it was considered that providing fencing adjacent to the existing footpath could adversely impact on the pedestrian environment and safety. Taking the above into account it is considered that the risks of the site becoming a focus for anti social behaviour are limited and are not sufficient of a concern to justify resisting this scheme.

The potential for light pollution is a consideration. The applicants have indicated that the lighting will be designed in accordance with the Institution of Lighting Engineers Guidelines on the reduction of obtrusive light. Lighting will be turned off when the building is not in use. The details of the external lighting scheme can be controlled by condition. It should also be noted that the existing footpath and car park is already lit.

Concerns have been expressed that the development will make the footpath that runs along the eastern boundary of the site unsafe. This is a well used link for accessing Crystal Peaks shopping centre via the Eckington Way pedestrian crossing. For two thirds of the length of the footpath the proposed store will not adversely affect the public safety along the footpath. In fact the CCTV coverage and additional surveillance/activity is likely to benefit public safety. However along the southern third of the footpath the store encroaches within 9m of the edge of the

125 path and there will be landscaped embankments sloping away from the path at a gradient of 1 in 3. The adjacent part of the store is the ‘back of house’, consequently there will be no surveillance from the store. The footpath will feel less open than at present and less overlooked as the store will screen it from Eckington Way. This is only likely to be an issue at night or when the store is closed. In discussion with the Council’s landscape architects, the applicant has designed the landscaping so as to create an attractive scheme, but minimising the impact on public safety. At the pinch point between the building and the footpath there will be a row of single stem trees planted in grass, the shrub beds nearest the footpath will be planted with shrubs that mature to between 0.45m and 1m high. As a result there will be a reasonably spacious zone either side of the footpath with a more open character, approximately 6m wide overall. Therefore, it can be concluded that the development will slightly worsen security along the southern third of the footpath. However given that a relatively spacious open zone will be retained along the footpath route, and it is a straight route, with a clear visibility along its length, it is considered that the impact is insufficient to justify opposing this scheme.

There will undoubtedly be some noise and possibly dust during construction. In the BREEAM pre-assessment submission the applicant has indicated that the development will be managed under the Considerate Constructors Scheme. Aldi has also indicated that they will adopt best practice for monitoring construction site impacts, including in respect of air pollution. It is considered that temporary disturbance that might be expected during construction is not sufficient reason to oppose the application. If problems do arise the Councils Environmental Protection Service has powers to resolve the issues.

A supermarket chain such as Aldi is unlikely to store waste in such a way that is likely to be harmful to residential amenity through smells and vermin. In the unlikely event that such problems did arise there is environmental health legislation to ensure satisfactory standards are maintained.

The National Air Quality Standards set air quality limits that are considered acceptable in maintaining human health. The amount of traffic attracted to a relatively small development such as this is unlikely to have a significant impact on air quality.

Sustainability Issues

Core Strategy Policy CS64 seeks to ensure new buildings are designed to reduce emissions of green house gases. The commentary on this policy says that to satisfy this policy, non-residential development over 500sqm gross internal floor space should achieve a BREEAM rating of very good.

Core Strategy Policy CS65 states that all significant developments will be required to provide a minimum of 10% of their predicted energy needs from decentralised and renewable or low carbon sources. They will also need to generate further renewable or low carbon energy, or include design measures sufficient to reduce the developments overall predicted carbon dioxide emissions by 20%, unless this can be shown to not be feasible or viable.

126

Core Strategy Policy CS67 requires all new development to limit surface water run off. On sites of less than 1 hectare surface water run off must be reduced as far as is feasible by design measures.

The applicants have produced a BREEAM pre assessment which shows they should be able to achieve a BREEAM very good rating for this site. A condition could be attached that will ensure the development achieves this standard and therefore meets the policy. The applicants have also set out how they incorporate sustainability initiatives in the design of the stores, such as, through the sourcing of materials, specification of finishes, and the use of recyclable materials. They have also listed examples of how they operate in a sustainable way, such as by minimising deliveries.

The applicants are not proposing to generate renewable or low carbon energy on the site. They are however intending to provide a heat recovery system which will recover heat from the food refrigeration circuits that would otherwise discharge to the atmosphere. It is anticipated that 100% of the heat load of the building can be satisfied by the heat recovery system. They have estimated that the energy needs of the foodstore would be 513,941 kwh per year, and it is anticipated that the heat recovery system would recover 115, 416 kwh per year.

The assessment of carbon dioxide emissions shows that the Target Emission Rate will be reduced by 26%. This is greater than the 20% required by policy CS 65. Therefore whilst the scheme does not meet this policy in terms of the generation of renewable energy, it does reduce carbon dioxide emissions more than is required and also a significant proportion of the buildings heating demand will be met by the low carbon energy recovery system. In combination these factors make the proposal acceptable in terms of terms of this policy.

The site area is just less than 1 hectare and therefore the design should seek to reduce surface water run off as far as is feasible. A condition can be attached requiring details of a scheme to reduce surface water run off and a sustainable urban drainage scheme to be submitted for approval, unless this is not feasible or practical. The applicants have agreed to a condition that would result surface water run off by 30%.

Design Issues.

Unitary Development Plan policy H14 states that new buildings should be well designed and in scale and character with neighbouring buildings. Policy BE5 states that good design and the use of good quality materials will be expected in all new and refurbished buildings. Core Strategy policy CS74 states that high quality development will be expected which would enhance the distinctive features of the city, including the townscape character of the city’s neighbourhoods, with their associated scale, layout, built form, building styles and materials.

To the west of the site are the larger commercial developments of Crystal Peaks district centre, the retail park and leisure uses, these are generally faced in brick and metal cladding. To the east there is an area of predominately two storey brick

127 faced housing with pitched roofs. The site is already occupied by a commercial use and has a main road frontage. In townscape terms it forms a transition between the larger scale commercial developments to the west and the domestic scale residential development to the east.

The building has been sited so that it addresses and reinforces the main Eckington Way Road frontage. Following pre-application discussions, the building has been elongated and made narrower, the levels reduced and building height suppressed, in order to minimise the visual impact on the residential properties to the east.

The site slopes from north to south. Although by necessity, the building has a single floor level, the entrance bays have a higher parapet, so that the building appears to step down the site with the topography. In order to reduce the visual mass of the elevations the ground level is banked up and landscaped at the southern end of the building.

The eaves height for most of the store is just over 5m which is similar to the eaves height of two storey dwellings, although the ground level has clearly been raised on the southern part of the site. The back of house area adjacent to the residential properties steps down approximately 1.8m in order to reduce the impact. Given that the building fronts onto a main distributor road the scale of the building is considered to be appropriate for its context.

The proposed store has been designed with a glazed entrance that faces towards Damon’s entrance incorporated a shared pedestrian forecourt. The glazing wraps around the east and west elevations and will help to create a more visually pleasing and active frontage to the main road.

The main part of the building is faced in red brickwork and white render with clerestory glazing along the Eckington Way frontage. The Eckington Way elevation is divided into a series of bays of white render panels which are sub- divided by projecting brick piers. These will help to break down the massing of the building. The south and east elevations are faced in brickwork and also sub-divided into panels by projecting brick piers.

The design of the building is simple and fairly contemporary. A pitched roof does not form part of the design as one of the key objectives is to minimise the scale and impact of the building on the housing to the east. The glazed frontage to the building is important in that is marks the entrance and helps to create a legible townscape, whilst providing some activity to the street frontage. Both the south and part of the east elevation will have a galvanised mesh clipped to the wall to encourage climbing plants establish. This includes the back of house wall nearest the residential properties. The intention is to green these walls and in the longer term this will help to soften the appearance of the development.

Whilst the building is not an example of high quality design, and therefore does not fully meet the design guidance, it will not appear out of character within its context, and the design and materials are considered to be appropriate for this transition site.

128 Green Space and Landscaping

The existing green space on the site occupies approximately 1650 sqm. Approximately 670 sqm will be lost to the proposed building, whilst approximately 260 sqm of car parking space will be converted to green space. The net change will therefore be a reduction of approximately 410 sqm. There is no doubt that this green space is well maintained and provides a pleasant space/outlook for the residential properties that face the site and for those using the footpath or passing the site. The majority of the green space affected comprises of short mown grass, there are no mature trees affected and the limited areas of ornamental shrub planting affected were planted when Damon’s was developed in the mid 1990s.

Due to the loss of the existing green space the applicants were asked to submit a detailed landscape scheme. This is so the quality of the proposed replacement landscaping can be judged at the time that the application is determined. The Councils landscape architect has assessed the submitted scheme and is satisfied that it is of a good standard. The existing hedge to Eckington Way, which forms an attractive boundary to the site, will be retained. The new planting scheme will be visually interesting and will be more bio-diverse than the existing. It will also include a significant number of new semi-mature trees, which will have a wider landscape benefit as they mature.

Whilst the proposed landscape scheme is considered to be higher quality than existing, many residents will see the construction of a building on part of the green space as harmful, in that they will view the development as reducing the openness and spaciousness of the area. However, as this space is not protected by policy and the overall visual impact of the scheme is considered to be satisfactory, it is considered that this does not justify opposing the proposal.

The applicants have offered to pay £5000 towards improvement of open space in the area. This contribution has not been sought by officers, as there is considered to be no policy basis for doing so. As the contribution would not address any planning issues it should be given no significant weight in determining this application.

RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS

It is not reasonable to delay the determination of this application until the retail study is published as there is sufficient evidence being submitted by the applicant to demonstrate that there is a need for more convenience goods floorspace.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The construction of a food discount store will bring benefits to the area in that it will expand shopping choice, claw back expenditure, encourage linked trips and reduce social exclusion. It is also consistent with retail shopping policy in that a need for the additional shopping floorspace has been established, the site is accessible by a choice of means of transport and the scale of the store is appropriate to the role and function of Crystal Peaks.

129 The traffic generated by the development would not have a significant impact on the highway network and most of the time customer parking is likely to be accommodated on site. On the limited occasions when this is not the case the overspill parking could be accommodated on street without significant detriment to traffic and pedestrian safety. Although there may be a limited amenity impact if some customers park on the wholly residential roads, such as Violet Close.

The design of the building is considered to be acceptable, although not high quality. There is likely to be some limited additional noise disturbance during deliveries and the outlook for residents that look over the site will be worsened. The setting of the footpath that crosses the site and its public safety may be marginally worsened at certain times. However, all these amenity impacts are considered to be within the bounds of acceptability and not sufficient to justify refusing planning permission.

There is considered to be a sequentially preferable alternative site available as part of the Waterthorpe development at the west end of Crystal Peaks. This scheme will provide an improved transport interchange. There is also a concern that despite there being sufficient surplus expenditure for two discount stores, the Aldi scheme could put this scheme at risk as it relies on funding from another discount operator to secure the improvement to the transport interchange. This could put at risk the strategy for maintaining and enhancing the vitality and viability of the centre and the strategic transport objectives which this scheme is intended to secure.

PPS 6 states that as a general rule new development will normally be expected to satisfy all the five main tests of need, scale, sequential approach, impact and accessibility. In this case it is considered that the proposal does not satisfy the sequential test and there are significant doubts as to whether it will put at risk the strategy for district centre. The benefits of increasing shopping choice, clawing back expenditure, encouraging linked trips and reducing social exclusion will all be secured on the sequentially preferable Waterthorpe site; they would perhaps be delivered earlier on the Damon’s site. It is concluded that these benefits do not outweigh the shopping policy objections and it is therefore recommended that planning consent be refused.

130

Case Number 09/02424/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Application to vary condition No. 2. (to extend opening hours to 0800 hours - 0130 hours on Sunday to Wednesday and 0800 hours - 0230 hours on Thursday to Saturday and Sundays immediately before Bank Holiday Mondays) of application No. 07/04931/FUL (Application under Section 73)

Location 117 Rockingham Street Sheffield S1 4EB

Date Received 27/07/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent DLP Planning Ltd

Recommendation Refuse

For the following reason(s):

1 The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposed extension of hours is unacceptable based on the potential for further noise and disturbance to surrounding residential uses, which would detract from the aim of successfully balancing city centre living with a vibrant night-time economy. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy H14 within the Sheffield Unitary Development Plan and the aims of the City Centre Living Strategy and the Interim Planning Guidance on Night Time Uses.

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. The applicant is advised that the current hours of opening for the unit are only valid for a temporary period of twelve months from 21st March 2009, those hours being:

0800 hours to 0030 hours on Sunday to Wednesday. 0730 hours to 0130 hours on Thursday to Saturday and Sundays before Bank Holidays.

Once this twelve month period had lapsed, then, the hours of opening will revert back to 0800 hours and 0030 hours on any day.

131 Site Location

PROPOSAL

The applicant received planning permission to use the ground floor of 117 Rockingham Street as a restaurant & bar (Use Class A3 & A4) in February 2008 (07/04931/FUL). Condition 2 within this original consent stated that:

‘The restaurant/bar shall only be used between 0800 hours and 0030 hours on any day.’

The applicant subsequently received consent in October 2008 to vary condition 2, in order to allow the restaurant & bar to open during the following hours for a temporary period of twelve months from first operation:

08:00 to 00:30 hours on Sunday to Wednesday.

07:30 to 01:30 hours on Thursday to Saturday and Sundays before Bank Holidays.

132 This twelve month period began on 21st March 2009.

Although the twelve month period is yet to elapse the applicant now wishes to vary condition 2 in order to operate during the following hours:

08:00 – 01:30 hours on Sunday to Wednesday.

08:00 – 02:30 hours on Thursday to Saturday and Sundays immediately before Bank Holiday Mondays.

LOCATION

The application building, which was historically a church hall, forms one of a grouping of buildings of high architectural merit located on the southern side of West Street, between Rockingham Street and Rockingham Lane.

Adjacent to the site to the south is a development of 75 one and two bedroom apartments with a basement car park, known as the Smithfield apartments. To the immediate rear of the building is a small development of ten apartments known as Bishops Lodge. Further residential developments occupy much of Rockingham Street to the south and include Phoenix Court and Flockton Court.

The site is set in extremely close proximity (13 metres) from West Street to the north, which is one of the most vibrant areas of the city centre throughout the evening.

The application site is within the City Centre Conservation Area. The building is also set within a Housing Area as defined in the Unitary Development Plan (UDP). The Central Shopping Area is set to the immediate north.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

South Yorkshire Police

The police have no misgivings about this application for extended trading hours as there is no evidence of crime and disorder, public safety concerns, public nuisance or child safety concerns associated with the premises.

Member Objection

Councillor Representation

Councillor Jillian Creasy has stated the following:

‘I object to extending opening hours during the week and weekends. This will create noise and public nuisance in a residential area. The applicant states that flats in the city centre are now built with adequate sound proofing, but the flats on Rockingham Street, including Flockton Court, predate the use of the city centre for intensive late night entertainment and are not designed to exclude noise. In particular, it should be noted that the most disruptive noise is from the street, as

133 customers leave the premises, being loudest and intermittent, so that assurances about keeping the volume down inside the building are irrelevant.’

Local Residents

There has been a petition submitted by the residents of Flockton Court with 37 signatures expressing the following:

- The current opening hours already cause significant disturbance to what is essentially a residential street and the proposed extended hours would only add to this disturbance.

- As a result of the opening of the bar, noise levels at night have dramatically increased. This is not just a problem at closing time but continues substantially late into the early hours of the morning.

- In addition to the general noise disturbance, the behaviour of drunk customers make Rockingham Street feel unsafe late at night.

- The above problems are intensified by customers of the bar using the car park entrance of Flockton Court as a gathering point out of the rain and as a smoking shelter.

There have been 4 individual letters of representation from local residents:

The first letter is from a resident of Flockton Court and mirrors the objections expressed within the larger petition, discussed above.

The second letter is from a resident of the Smithfield apartments and expresses the following:

- Living next door to this bar means I can not have my windows open past 7pm at night, which is the point the noise and anti social behaviour begins to increase.

- I am a young professional and enjoy bars such as Soyo every now and again, but it is not necessary to extend opening hours to the same as a typical nightclub.

- Later opening hours means less security and more anti social behaviour.

- The bar already makes the street unsafe and noisy to walk down and extending opening hours would only make this worse.

- The third letter is from a resident of the Smithfield apartments and expresses the following:

- At present, particularly at weekends, noise levels from the bar and particularly on the streets are disruptive, which amongst other things is

134 disruptive to residents sleep. If the hours of the bar are lengthened, there will be more noise which will further increase this disruption.

- It is very unpleasant to return to the building late at night.

- I cannot see the need for bars to remain open later, it will add to the amount of people drunk on the street and as a result may even add to the strain placed on local services.

- The fourth letter is from a resident of Bishops Lodge, which is set to the immediate rear of the bar, and expresses the following:

- The presence of this bar will devalue my property.

- The level of street noise has dramatically increased since the bar opened.

- The increased street activity causes issues such as litter and also leads to health and safety concerns.

- I can often hear and sing along to the music being played in the bar, which gets louder as the night becomes later.

- The noise of bottles being emptied occurs throughout the night.

- The increase in hours will further significantly impact my ability to sleep at all.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Impact on Amenity

Sheffield Unitary Development Plan (UDP)

Policy H14: Conditions on Development in Housing Areas within the UDP states that in housing areas new development or change of use applications should not lead to air pollution, noise, smell, excessive traffic levels or other nuisance, or pose a risk to health and safety for people living nearby.

City Centre Living Strategy (CCLS)

The CCLS was approved by Cabinet in 2004 and forms Supplementary Planning Guidance. One of the key goals of this document is to ensure that potential conflict between residential uses and late night venues is managed.

Interim Planning Guidance on Night Time Uses (IPG)

The IPG aims to find a harmony and balance between city centre living and a vibrant night-time economy, in order to ensure a successful city centre in both senses. This document was approved by Cabinet in 2005 and identifies two areas

135 of the city centre in which the amenity of existing and future residents should particularly be protected from undue noise and disturbance after a reasonable time of night. The IPG identifies 00.30am as this reasonable time of night. The application site does not fall within one such area and must therefore be judged on its individual merits.

Guideline 2 within the IPG states that leisure and food and drink uses will only be allowed if: a) Conditions for nearby residents and people working in the area will not be harmed by noise breakout, traffic, parking on nearby streets, odours, street noise or general disturbance. b) They are unlikely to lead to anti-social behaviour that would disturb residents, workers or users of the area.

In considering this application, the impact of the proposed extension of hours on the amenity of surrounding residential occupiers, in what is a designated Housing Area, is the primary concern. Given the large amount of residential use in the immediate area, it was considered reasonable to apply more restrictive opening hours than on other late night uses in the wider area when the original restaurant & bar use was consented (07/04931/FUL). In this respect, 00:30 was considered to be a reasonable hour, given that the Interim Planning Guidance on Night Times Uses (IPG) advocates this in areas with high residential value.

When considering the second application to extend the hours of opening to 01:30 hours on Thursday to Saturday and Sundays before Bank Holidays, it was considered reasonable to allow this for a temporary period of twelve months, given the proximity of West Street (13 metres to the north), which does create relatively high background noise levels. The rationale being that this temporary extension would allow a better understanding if operating the unit later into the night would suitably protect the amenity of surrounding residents.

To assess the noise impact of the bar in respect of noise breakout and general street noise and disturbance the applicants have provided a noise report. Although the conclusions of this report do suggest that the proposed revised opening hours of the bar would not cause any undue noise and disturbance to surrounding residents, the officers contest this and feel that the conclusions presented are open to question.

These concerns include the fact that the report identifies a notable drop in street noise between 01:30 and 02:30 on Saturday morning when the bar is closed, which would be countered if the extension of hours was approved, as patrons of the premises would still be in the area. Another key concern is that no accurate allowance can be made for sporadic noise of people shouting in the street, which is generally the cause of the greatest distress to residents, given the unpredictable nature of this sort of activity.

Further to the above, the Council’s Environmental Protection Service have received three separate complaints relating to noise from activities connected with

136 customers of the bar from occupants of Flockton Court. It is also evident from the representations of surrounding residents to this application that the current operating hours of the unit are causing noise and disturbance to these residents late into the night. This noise disturbance is as a result of ancillary behaviour associated with the use, including patrons leaving the premises or smoking outside.

In light of this, this application to further extend the hours is considered to exacerbate matters and will undoubtedly lead to further complaints.

RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS

It was identified by a resident in the Bishops Lodge apartments, which is set to the rear of the bar and shares a party wall, that noise was breaking through from the bar and causing disturbance. Following mitigation works and through noise testing this issue has now been suitably resolved.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The proposed extension of hours is unacceptable based on the potential for further noise and disturbance to surrounding residential uses, which would detract from the aim of successfully balancing city centre living and a vibrant night-time economy. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy H14 within the Sheffield Unitary Development Plan and the aims of the City Centre Living Strategy and the Interim Planning Guidance on Night Time Uses and is recommended for refusal.

137

Case Number 09/02033/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Erection of a part 1 x 2-storey and part 1 x 3-storey building for use a managed workspace (Use Class B1) with community use (Use Class D1), including secure bin & recycling store and associated car park accommodation & landscaping and modification to the Phase 2 Business Centre to accommodate the access road

Location Land East Of Alison Centre And Rear Of Manor Community Childcare Centre Alison Crescent Sheffield

Date Received 02/07/2009

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent Architecture 00 Ltd

Recommendation Visit by Planning Highways Area Board

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act.

2 The development must be carried out in complete accordance with the following approved documents:

Plans (excluding the car park layout where shown: 0088[PL]002, 0088[PL]003, 0088[PL]021, 0088[PL]020, 0088[PL]010 Rev C, 0088[PL]011 Rev C, 0088[PL]012 Rev C, 0088[PL]013, 0088[PL]015, 0088[PL]022, 0088[PL]023, 0088[PL]014, 0088[PL]030, 0088[PL]031, 0088[PL]032 and Car parking layout plan 0088[PL]015 (received by e-mail dated 20th October 2009)

Unless otherwise authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to define the permission.

138 3 Notwithstanding the approved plans, details, including samples, of all proposed external materials and finishes, including windows and block work colours, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

4 Large scale details, including materials and finishes, at a minimum of 1:20 of the items listed below shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of development:

(a) Windows and frames; (b) Window reveals; (c) Doors; (d) External wall construction; (e) Folding and sliding screens to the windows and doors; (f) Rainwater goods;

Thereafter, the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

5 Before any work on site is commenced, a comprehensive and detailed hard and soft landscape scheme for the site shall have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The landscape works shall be implemented prior to the development being brought into use or within an alternative timescale to be first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the landscaped areas shall be retained and shall not be used for any other purpose without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority. They shall be cultivated and maintained for a period of 5 years from the date of implementation and any plant failures within that five year period shall be replaced.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality.

6 Prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved, a landscape management strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing to include details of the following:

(i) Identify management responsibilities for the maintenance of the following landscape features: the landscape buffer between the car park and the residents on Normancroft Way and Normancroft Drive, the landscaping beneath the secure access bridge, landscaping (boulder maze etc) to the south and east of the building within the area of open space; (ii) A schedule to identify how often and when these areas identified in (i) above will be maintained; (iii) A strategy to manage any planting failures for a minimum period of 5 years from the first occupation of the development.

139

The development shall be implemented in accordance with the above details and thereafter retained.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality.

7 Prior to the commencement of development, further details of all proposed boundary treatment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatment shall be installed prior to the use of the development commencing in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

8 Before development commences, further details of the proposed ‘green wall’ (the use of vegetation to grow over the mesh elevations) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include the following:

(i) The location, depth and form of the planting medium in relation to the building, to include means of protection; (ii) The size of planting container (to be a minimum of 10 litres); (iii) The means of ‘fixing’ to allow the plants to establish to the ‘mesh’ (iv) Plant species, to include a mixture of deciduous, evergreen and semi- evergreen; (v) A watering strategy; (vi) A long-term maintenance strategy.

The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of the use and thereafter retained.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

9 Before development commences, further details of the secure access bridge over the public footway shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to include the following:

(i) Details of the external appearance of the bridge from the footway to include the barrier design and details of materials to be used; (ii) A construction drawing of the bridge and all structural calculations; (iii) Details of the deck (to include materials); (iv) Details of the supporting gabion wall to include materials.

The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of the use and thereafter retained.

To ensure safety of the footpath and in the interest of highway safety.

140 10 The development shall not be used unless the car parking accommodation for 28 vehicles as shown on the approved plans has been provided in accordance with those plans and thereafter such car parking accommodation shall be retained for the sole purpose intended.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

11 The gradient of shared pedestrian/vehicular access shall not exceed 1:12 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

12 Prior to the commencement of the use of the development, further details of servicing and delivery arrangements shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include:

(i) The type of servicing vehicles to be expected; (ii) Short-stay parking provision for servicing vehicles; (iii) The restricted hours for delivery;

The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of the use and thereafter retained.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

13 Before the development is commenced, details of the means of ingress and egress for vehicles engaged in the construction of the development, to include details of the route into the site from the highway and the means to manage any potential crossing of the public footpath by construction vehicles, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the arrangements for restricting the vehicles to the approved ingress and egress points. Ingress and egress for such vehicles shall be obtained only at the approved points.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

14 Before the development is commenced, full details of suitable and sufficient cycle parking accommodation within the site shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the shall not be used unless such cycle parking has been provided in accordance with the approved plans and, thereafter, such cycle parking accommodation shall be retained.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

15 Before any operations are commenced on site, details of the location and extent of the site compound within the site curtilage to include the following:

(i) details of site accommodation,

141 (ii) Locations for the storage of plant and materials, provision for the parking and manoeuvring of site operatives and visitor vehicles; (iii) Location for the loading/unloading and manoeuvring of goods vehicles to be designed, laid out and constructed all to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority

Shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction compound shall be created in accordance with the approved details and maintained free from impediment throughout the duration of construction works.

In the interests of the amenities of adjoining resident and the safety of the adjoining highway.

16 Before any operations are commenced (excluding the condition above) a temporary access shall be created near to the location of the existing access to the Alison Business Centre (unless otherwise approved by the LPA) for use by all site vehicles, the details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The temporary access shall be laid out and constructed with a solid bound material and maintained thereafter free from impediment throughout the duration of construction works.

In the interests of the amenities of adjoining resident and the safety of the adjoining highway.

17 The use of the workspace within the approved development as shown on the approved plans shall be only in accordance with Use Class B1 (Business) of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).

In the interests of the amenities of the locality.

18 The use of the community facility within the approved development as shown on the approved plans shall be only in accordance with Use Class D1 (Non-residential institution) of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).

In the interests of the amenities of the locality.

19 The workspace within Use Class B1 hereby approved within the development shall be used only between the hours of 0745 to 1930 Monday to Fridays, 0745 to 1300 on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

20 The community facility within the approved development within Use Class D1 shall be used only between the hours of 0745 and 2200 Monday to

142 Fridays, 0745 and 1930 on Saturdays and between 1000 and 1700 on Sundays and Bank Holidays

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

21 Prior to the commencement of development, further details of all external lighting to be installed within the car park, along the access road and beneath the access bridge, to include details of the type of lighting (manufacturers details), levels of luminance and level of light spill shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of the use.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

22 Prior to the commencement of development, further details of the incorporation of a close circuit television system beneath the access bridge shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of the use unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and the safety of footpath users.

23 Surface water and foul drainage shall drain to separate systems.

To ensure satisfactory drainage arrangements.

24 Before work on site is commenced, full details of suitable inclusive access and facilities for disabled people, both to and into the building(s) and within the curtilage of the site, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be used unless such inclusive access and facilities have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. Thereafter such inclusive access and facilities shall be retained. (Reference should also be made to the Code of Practice BS8300).

To ensure ease of access and facilities for disabled persons at all times.

25 No externally mounted plant or equipment for heating, cooling or ventilation purposes, nor grilles, ducts, vents for similar internal equipment, shall be fitted to the building unless full details thereof have first been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and once installed such plant or equipment should not be altered without prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

143

26 Amplified sound (including radios) shall only be played within the building in such a way that noise breakout to the street does not exceed:

(i) background noise levels by more than 3dB(A) when measured as a 15 minute LAeq,

(ii) any octave band centre frequency by more than 3dB when measured as a 15 minute Leq, when measured at the façade of the nearest residential properties on Normancroft Way and Normancroft Drive.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

27 Before the development is commenced, full details of proposals for the inclusion of public art within the development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall then be implemented prior to the occupation of the development unless otherwise authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to satisfy the requirements of Policy BE12 of the Unitary Development Plan and to ensure that the quality of the built environment is enhanced.

28 Prior to the occupation of any part of the development, a detailed Travel Plan(s), designed to: reduce the need for and impact of motor vehicles, including fleet operations; increase site accessibility; and to facilitate and encourage alternative travel modes, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Detailed Travel Plan(s) shall be developed in accordance with a previously approved Framework Travel Plan for the proposed development, where that exists. The Travel Plan(s) shall include:

On occupation, the approved Travel Plan(s) shall thereafter be implemented, subject to any variations approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of the amenities of occupiers of adjoining property.

144 29 Before the development is commenced full details of the proposed refuse and recycling storage facilities to be provided to serve the development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include a method statement indicating how the facilities will be managed and serviced and how occupiers of the proposed development will be encouraged to maximise the use of the proposed recycling facilities to reduce general waste arising. Prior to the occupation of the proposed development the approved facilities shall have been implemented in conjunction with the approved method statement and shall thereafter be retained.

In order to ensure that proper provision for refuse is made and to encourage the maximum use of recycling in the interests of protecting the environment

30 Before any work on site is commenced, a report shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority identifying how the following will be provided:

a) a minimum of 10% of the predicted energy needs of the of the completed development being obtained from decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy; and b) The Generation of further renewable or low carbon energy or incorporation of design measures sufficient to reduce the development’s overall predicted carbon dioxide emissions by 20%. This would include the decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy to satisfy (a)

Any agreed renewable or low carbon energy equipment, connection to decentralised or low carbon energy sources or additional energy efficiency measures shall have been installed before any part of the development is occupied and a post-installation report shall have been submitted to an approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that the agreed measures have been installed. Thereafter the agreed equipment, connection or measures shall be retained in use and maintained for the lifetime of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

31 The development hereby approved shall be constructed to achieve a minimum rating of BREEAM ‘very good’ and before the development is occupied (or within an alternative timescale to be agreed) the relevant certification, demonstrating that BREEAM ‘very good’ has been achieved, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of mitigating the effects of climate change, in accordance with Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy Policy CS64.

145 Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

BE5 - Building Design and Siting BE8 - Access to Workplaces LR5 - Development in Open Space Areas T22 - Private Car Parking in new Development CS45 - Quality and Accessibility of Open Space CS47 - Safeguarding Open Space CS64 - Climate Change, Resources and Sustainable Design of Developments CS65 Renewable Energy and Carbon Reduction

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. As the proposed development will involve the closing/diversion of a footpath(s) you are advised to contact the Director of Legal and Administrative Services, Town Hall, Sheffield, S1 2HH, as soon as possible with a view to the necessary authority being obtained for the closure/diversion of the footpath(s) under Section 257 of the Town and country Planning Act 1990.

2. You are required as part of this development, to carry out works within the public highway: As part of the requirements of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 (Section 54), 3rd edition of the Code of Practice 2007, you must give at least three months written notice to the Council, informing us of the date and extent of works you propose to undertake.

The notice should be sent to:-

Sheffield City Council Highways and Transport Division Howden House 1 Union Street Sheffield S1 2SH

For the attention of Mr P Vickers

146

Please note failure to give the appropriate notice may lead to a fixed penalty notice being issued and any works on the highway being suspended.

3. You are required, as part of this development, to carry out works within the public highway. You must not start any of this work until you have received a signed consent under the Highways Act 1980. An administration/inspection fee will be payable and a Bond required as part of the consent.

You should apply for a consent to: -

Highways Adoption Group Development Services Sheffield City Council Howden House, 1 Union Street Sheffield S1 2SH

For the attention of Mr S Turner Tel: (0114) 27 34383

4. The applicant is advised that the signage indicated on the submitted drawings is not approved as part of this permission and will require separate Advertisement Consent. To discuss arrangements for obtaining such consent, and to request application forms, the applicant should contact Development Control Section, Development Services, on Sheffield (0114) 2734215 or go to www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/planning-and-city- development

5. The applicant is advised that noise and vibration from demolition and construction sites can be controlled by Sheffield City Council under Section 60 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974. As a general rule, where residential occupiers are likely to be affected, it is expected that noisy works of demolition and construction will be carried out during normal working hours, i.e. 0800 to 1800 hours Monday to Friday, and 0800 to 1300 hours on Saturdays with no working on Sundays or Public Holidays. Further advice, including a copy of the Council's Code of Practice for Minimising Nuisance from Construction and Demolition Sites is available from the Environmental Protection Service, 2-10 Carbrook Hall Road, Sheffield, S9 2DB: Tel - 0114 2734651.

6. The Council is responsible for allocating house numbers and road names to both new developments and conversions of existing buildings. Developers must therefore contact the Council’s Street Naming and Numbering Officer on (0114) 2736127 to obtain official addresses for their properties as soon as construction works commence.

147 7. From the 6th April 2008, the Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications and Deemed Applications) Regulations 2008 require that all requests for confirmation of compliance with planning conditions require a fee payable to the Local Planning Authority. An application to the Local Planning Authority will be required using the new national standard application forms. Printable forms can be found at www.sheffield.gov.uk/planning or apply online at www.planningportal.gov.uk. The charge for this type of application is £85 or £25 if it relates to a condition on a householder application for development.

Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

This application relates to 0.42 hectares of public open space that lies to the east of the Manor Development Company’s Business Centre at Alison Crescent and to the north of the Manor Community Childcare Centre. The application site also adjoins the rear boundaries of residential properties at 23, 25, 32 and 34 Normancroft Drive and Nos. 52, 54, 56, 58 and 60 Normancroft Way.

148

The application site is predominantly grassed with areas of boundary planting and incidental planting. A public footpath runs along its southern boundary; this route connects Alison Crescent with the strategic footpath and cycle track that extends from Castlebeck Avenue to Vikinglea Road and onward through the Manor Estate to Vikinglea Drive and Harborough Avenue. The site is characterised by a change in level of approximately 3 metres between the footpath and the boundary with the residential properties above, which is evident in the grass banking that slopes up from the footpath towards the houses.

The buildings surrounding the open space include the existing MCD Alison Business Centre, which was constructed in 1996 and comprises a number of single and two storey business units built around a central courtyard/parking area with access from Alison Crescent. This development is inward-looking with extensive planting to the boundary with the public footpath. The Business Centre is functional in design, constructed in red and buff brickwork with a tiled roof. Adjacent to the Business Centre is the single storey community children’s nursery, which was built in 2001. This is also very functional in appearance and is constructed in buff brick with a red tiled roof. The nursery has a number of windows to each elevation that are all fitted with roller shutters for security. The nearest residential dwellings on Normancroft Way and Normancroft Drive comprise two storey and bungalow properties, mainly constructed in buff brick with a tiled roof. Beyond this immediate site, the surrounding area is predominantly residential with the majority of housing constructed in the 1980s.

This is a full planning application principally proposing the construction of a 1 x 3 storey building to provide an extension to the Alison Business Centre comprising the provision of 1410 square metres of new workspace units within Use Class B1 (Business) and a new community facility extending to 150 square metres.

The proposed building is broadly rectangular in form and sits parallel to the existing footpath. It incorporates a shallow crank to the front elevation to respond to the curve of the footpath and presents a 64.5 metre frontage to this path. The depth of the building extends from a minimum of 10.5 metres at the north-eastern end to a maximum of 13.5 metres where the building cranks centrally within the façade. It has been positioned to enhance the safety and security of the area by presenting a strong frontage to the footpath with generous areas of glazing to encourage natural surveillance and passive overlooking. This is further promoted by the internal arrangement of the communal working and meeting spaces, which have been positioned against this façade.

To the rear of the building is a secure car park with parking for 28 vehicles as well as the provision of a bin store. The car park sits at a similar level to the rear gardens of properties on Normancroft Way. Access to the car park is achieved through the existing Business Centre with vehicular access from Alison Crescent. The existing footpath that runs through the site has to be retained such that vehicular access is segregated from the footpath by means of a metal bridge that over sails the footpath by a minimum height of 2.2 metres. This bridge is a single carriageway and includes a pedestrian and cycle facility such that it extends to 5 metres in width. The road surface will be constructed in conventional asphalt.

149 The bridge supports adjoining the footpath will be treated in either ‘criblock’ (a concrete retaining wall system) or gabions too allow soft planting. This will create a generous ‘cutting’ of 4 metres beneath the bridge, comprising the footpath and a landscaped strip.

The building addresses the sloping topography of the site such that it is three storeys to the front flank adjoining the footpath and the existing business centre and then reduces to two storeys towards the rear adjacent to the existing residential properties. Level 00, which equates to the ground floor at the eastern end of the building, comprises the community space and ancillary facilities, a plant room and office facilities. The main access to Level 00 is from the front elevation from the area of existing open space although it is also accessible from the upper floors by means of a lift and stair core. Level 01 is the main level along the entire length of the building and accommodates 9 workshops that vary in size between 44 square metres and 68 square metres, a flexible workspace for general use, a community workshop, reception area and ancillary W.C. facilities. A level access is provided from the rear car park with a lift and stairs to the lower and upper floors. Level 02 is the upper floor, which extends to approximately three-quarters of the floor plate. This level is accessed via a lift and stairs from the lower levels and will provide 10 workshops that range between 24 square metres and 30 square metres, a prestige office space, a general workspace/community space and a small 50 square metre roof terrace.

Architecturally, the proposed facility is designed to be durable and secure. The building is constructed in simple blockwork at Level 00 with Levels 01 and 02 constructed in powder metal composite panels. These ‘backing’ materials will be coloured to create a softer façade. The building will then be clad entirely in an expanded metal mesh screen, which will allow climbing plants to grow over it to green the façade. Climbing plants such as ‘Virginia Creeper’ will be used because it grows at a rapid rate such that a substantial proportion of the building would be covered within 12 to 18 months. Full height glazing is incorporated at intervals within the façades, which will then be concealed by folding and sliding screens when the building is not in use to ensure that the external treatment is robust. The premises are designed with a gently sloping mono-pitch roof that slopes down toward the residential properties on Normancroft Way.

The application also proposes to modify the existing Alison Business Centre to enable the construction of the new access road and a new gatehouse building that will effectively link the two sites. The works will require the demolition of the existing toilet block, which forms part of the courtyard elevation facing the nursery and the construction of a single storey extension of the existing building by a length of 8.2 metres towards Vikinglea Road, effectively to create a new toilet block. This new extension will have a pitch roof to match the existing building and will be roofed in tiles re-used from the removed toilet block. The elevations will be clad in metal mesh to visually connect this new extension to the new Phase. The extension will not project beyond the frontage of the existing Business Centre buildings facing Vikinglea Road.

Finally, it is proposed that the area between the new main building and the footpath and to the east of the building is landscaped to include planting and new woodland

150 and a possible natural play area that includes a boulder maze, which is influenced by the landscape of the Peak District.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

There is no planning history directly relevant to this site.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

This application was advertised by means of a site notice as a development in the public interest, a press notice and direct neighbour notification. A public meeting was also held on Tuesday 8th September.

Five letters of objection have been received from occupiers at 15, 16, 25 and 26 Normancroft Drive and 54 Normancroft Way, which raise the following issues:

- The development is taking more green space; - The relationship of the development to the adjoining houses is a concern in terms of overlooking and loss of privacy; - The building is an eyesore and is out of character; the mesh and planting will encourage damage; - Noise and pollution from the development; - The existing workshops are currently empty so why do Manor Development Trust want to build more; - 24-hour access would be problematic (it is relevant to note that the applicant did not apply for 24-hour access); - The boulder maze will be a trip hazard; - The turning area for vehicles is close to the houses and will cause a disturbance;

A letter has also been received from the Secretary of the Lower Manor Tenants and Residents’ Association (TARA) that includes a petition with 96 signatures from the surrounding area to ‘say no to more units being built’. TARA raises the following issues:

- The tree survey shows a range of trees to be removed but these have already been removed; - There is inaccuracies in the plans, including one of the adjoining houses that is show as two storeys when it is, in fact, a bungalow; - Plans indicated various public consultations with local residents but the early consultation they refer to did not happen; - The building is not in keeping with the surrounding area in appears and is contrary to Policy CS74 of the Core Strategy; - The development will result in increases in noise, traffic and light pollution; - The cattle grid style bridge will be noisy (the cattle grid surface has since been omitted from the scheme); - The plans include a lorry turning point within the car park close to properties on Normancroft Drive and Normancroft Way, which will result in loss of amenity and more traffic in the locality;

151 - The anti-social behaviour in this area is typically behind the nursery building and this building will potentially encourage further anti-social behaviour and will bring this closer to existing properties; - The large boulders in the landscaped area will cause accidents and will create a security blind spot; - The bridge will encourage anti-social behaviour as it will attract youths to congregate; - The current development has a landscaped buffer zone to the open space but this is not maintained and the residents are concerned about the impact and maintenance of the new buffer zone. Houses overlooking the dense foliage will not be able to see and this will increase opportunities for crime; - Residents were not consulted about the 24 hour access; - The local area used to have large areas of green space, which was reduced through Phases 1 and 2 of the Business Centre and this development will reduce it even more; - MDC may see this as a gateway for future developments and this will change the view of the residential area into one more suited to an industrial estate.

Councillor Jan Wilson has submitted the following comments on the proposal on the grounds that the application has caused considerable local concern and Councillor Wilson wishes the following comments to be considered:

- Loss of open space; - Proximity of buildings to the nearest homes; - Is the access bridge suitable? Will it be an attractor for anti-social behaviour; - Will increased vehicle movements have an unreasonable impact on local residents; - Materials to be of a good quality; - Hours of operation during construction; - Hours of operation of the development; - Management of the development and - The standard of maintenance of the soft landscaping.

A letter of support has also been forwarded via the Manor Development Trust from a resident on Vikinglea Glade, who has advised that she wants to remove her signature from the petition as the resident believed she was signing in favour of the plans for the community space and the play area. The letter states that the plan to provide activities for families and children is a needed in the area.

A letter of support from Manor After School Kids Klub has also been received. They welcome the introduction of the bridge on the grounds that it takes into account the safety of local children and the proposes area in front of the community facility is also described as ‘ideal’ to divert children away from the bridge. The After School Kids Klub also questions the actual extent of anti-social behaviour in this area as intimated by the letters of objection.

152 PLANNING ASSESSMENT

This application proposes the construction of a 1 x 3 storey building to provide an extension to the Alison Business Centre comprising the provision of 1410 square metres of new workspace units within Use Class B1 (Business) and a new community facility extending to 150 square metres with associated landscaping and car parking. It also proposes a small single storey extension to the existing Business Centre to mitigate for the loss of accommodation required to create the vehicular access to the new site and to create a gatehouse to link the two sites. The key issues to consider in the determination of this application include the following: i. Principle of development: Policy and Land Use; ii. Design and appearance of the proposed development; iii. Highways issues; iv. Impact on the amenity of adjoining residential occupiers; v. Landscape design; vi. Sustainability. vii. Regeneration impacts.

Principle of development: Policy and Land Use

The application site is positioned on land that is designated for public open space within the Sheffield Adopted Unitary Development Plan and the proposal must therefore be assessed against relevant national and local planning policies.

Planning Policy Guidance Note 17: Open Space, Sport and Recreation requires that open space policy is founded on an understanding of local open space needs and advises that Local Authorities should undertake robust assessments to consider the quality and accessibility of open spaces. This principle is incorporated within the local policy objectives set out in both the UDP and Core Strategy, which are considered below.

Policy LR5 of the UDP relates to development in open space areas and lists criteria against which development in Open Space Areas must be assessed. With particular relevance to this site, Policy LR5 determines that development will not be permitted where it would (as relevant to this site):

(b) Cause damage to mature or ancient woodland or result in a significant loss of mature trees;

(d) It would make an open space ineffective as an environmental buffer or;

(h) It would result in the loss of open space which is of such quality that it is of City- wide importance; or

(i) It would result in overdevelopment or harm the character of an area; or

153 (k) The proposed use would be incompatible with surrounding land-uses.

In assessing this application against the policy criteria above, the following is advised:

(b) With regard to woodland and the loss of mature trees, a total of 14 trees will be lost as a result of this development of which four have already been removed. The trees were not the subject of a Tree Preservation Order and their removal was not unlawful. A tree survey submitted with this application identifies that 4 of the 14 trees were deemed to be of a moderate quality with the remainder being low quality or young trees. Whilst the loss of any trees is regrettable, it is not considered that the proposed tree removal is contrary to Policy LR5 (b) as it does not constitute a significant loss of mature trees. Furthermore, the applicant will be required to submit a detailed landscape proposal as a condition of this recommendation, which will seek an equal replacement of trees at a minimum standard of semi-mature.

(c) Whilst this application is clearly constructed on a piece of open space, the Council has undertaken an open space provision assessment, which analyses the extent of open space in the locality of the site. The UDP determines that the local population should have access to both formal recreation space (e.g. outdoor sport areas and children’s play areas) and informal recreation space (e.g. parks). Local is defined as within 400 metres of the site. The assessment determines that within a 400 metre catchment area of the application site there is 8.34 hectares of informal open space for every 1000 of the population in that area. A quantitative shortage would amount to 2.7 hectares per 1000 population, which demonstrates that there is an over-provision of informal open space provision in the locality of the site. There is less formal open space within 400 metres of the site, equating to 1.11 hectares per 1000 population. A quantitative shortage is defined as less than 1.3 hectares per 1000 population. However, overall, the level of open space per every 1000 population within 400 metres of this site equates to 9.44 hectares; a quantitative shortage is less than 4 hectares. Given the significant overprovision of informal open space within 400 metres of the site and the fact that a generous area of open space is retained, the loss of 0.42 hectares will not significantly detract from the green and open character of the Green Network.

(d) An environmental buffer is defined in the UDP as ‘landscaping and or siting of appropriate facilities between sensitive and other uses to reduce the harm or potential nuisance to each other. Car parks or offices, for example, might form such a buffer’. In this case, the open space does not have a role as an environmental buffer and on this basis; it is not contrary to Policy LR5 (d). Indeed, the building and car park will effectively form a buffer between the residential properties and the open space.

(h) The open space is not considered to be of City-wide importance and is therefore not contrary to LR5 (h). It is clearly of importance locally but as noted above, there is an over-provision of informal open space within a 400 metre catchment area of the site.

154 (i) In terms of whether the development would result in overdevelopment or harm the character of an area, the visual impact of the proposed development and the relationship to adjoining residential occupiers is considered in the report below but is it is considered that the scheme can be provided such that it does not represent an over-development of the area or harm its character.

(k) In terms of whether the proposed use would be incompatible with surrounding land-uses; the area surrounding the application site includes both existing commercial business units within the adjoining Manor Development Company premises and residential uses. This application proposes the construction of workshops within Use Class B1 (Business) and a community facility within Use Class D1 (Non-residential institutions). Use Class B1 is defined as a business use that can be carried out in any residential area without detriment to the amenity of that area by reason of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, soot, ash, dust or grit. As such, the principle of such a use within the vicinity of residential properties is not considered to be incompatible in principle. The introduction of a community facility to serve the local community would be determined an acceptable use within a housing area and is therefore considered compatible as a use adjoining a residential area. The application is therefore considered to comply with Policy LR5 (k).

It is also relevant to note Policy CS45 of the recently adopted Sheffield Development Framework Core Strategy, which advises that safeguarding and improvement of open space will take priority over the creation of new areas and the priority for improvement will be district parks and open spaces and areas that are more than 1200 metres from a district park or open space that both delivers a range of formal and informal recreation space. As noted above, there is an over- provision of open space within the local area (within 400 metres) and a sufficient level of informal open space is therefore safeguarded. Although it is acknowledged that there is a marginal under-provision of formal open space in the local area, this application does not impact upon that provision on the basis that the application site is on land classified as informal open space. On this basis, it is not considered to conflict with the objectives of Policy CS45.

Finally, it is relevant to note Policy CS47 of the Core Strategy, which also relates to development in open space and advises that development in open space will not be permitted where (as relevant to this site): a) it would result in a quantitative shortage of either informal or formal open space in the local area; or b) it would result in the loss of open space that is of high quality or of heritage, landscape or ecological value; or c) people in the local area would be denied easy or safe access to a local park or to smaller informal open space that is valued or well used by people living or working in the local area; or d) it would cause or increase a break in the city’s Green Network;

155 Development that would still result in the loss of open space will only be permitted where e) as soon as practicable, equivalent or better replacement open space would be provided in the local area; or f) the site is identified as surplus for its current open space function and i. A proposed replacement would, as soon as practicable, remedy a deficiency in another type of open space in the same local area; or ii. It could not fulfil other unsatisfied open space needs; or g) the development would be ancillary to the open space and have a minimal impact on the use or character of the open space

In assessing this application against the above criteria, the following is advised: a) The open space assessment that is detailed in the report above clearly demonstrates that the level of informal and formal open space per every 1000 population within 400 metres of this site equates to 9.44 hectares; a quantitative shortage in the City is less than 4 hectares. The application site forms part of the informal open space provision within the area of which there is a significant over- provision. Although there is a slight under provision of formal open space in the area, this application does not impact on that provision and is therefore not considered to be contrary to Policy CS47 (a). Members may also wish to be aware that the Council’s South Sheffield Regeneration Team have confirmed that they propose to install a multi-use games area on land at Saxonlea Avenue, which is anticipated for completion in 2010 and are also proposing to invest in a natural play area and new 5-a-side pitch on land adjacent to the existing Manor Community Nursery. This should re-dress, to a degree, the under provision of formal space in the area; b) The issue of the quality of the open space and the landscape value is considered above in response to Policy LR5. c) Although noting that the local population will lose 0.42 hectares of informal open space and the residents immediately adjuring the application site will have to walk further to the remaining open space, it remains within a 5 minute walk and it is not considered that local people would be denied easy or safe access to a local park or to smaller informal open space that is valued or well used. Furthermore, it is anticipated that the introduction of the business and community centre onto this site will improve natural surveillance of the remaining area of open space and promote its use during the daytime and evening. The application is therefore not considered to be contrary to Policy CS47 (c). d) As noted above in response to Policy LR5(c), the development is only on part of the open space and will not cause a break in the City’s Green Network, in accordance with Policy CS47 (d);

156 e) With regard to the provision of equivalent or better replacement open space, there is already an over provision of informal space in the area, as well as the proposals above to introduce improved formal open space provision, which is considered to address the objectives of Policy CS47 (e); f) The site is effectively surplus in the locality given the over-supply of informal open space. However, given the sloping topography of the site it would not be suitable for many forms of formal open space such as a 5-a-side pitch and it could therefore not fulfil other unsatisfied open space needs, which are already being addressed in the area as noted above. The proposal is therefore in accordance with Policy CS47 (f); h) It is not considered that the proposed development in its entirety would be ancillary to the open space and in this regard, it does not comply with Policy CS47 (h). However, the community facility, which fronts onto the open space at ground level, is considered appropriate to the open space and compatible with it rather than ancillary. Moreover, it is anticipated that the natural surveillance provided by this facility will further promote the safe use of the open space. On this basis, although the proposal is not in accordance with Policy CS47 (h), it is not considered that the development will significantly harm the character of the open space nor is the lack of compliance with this criteria sufficient on its own, to warrant refusal of the application.

It is therefore concluded that the proposed development of the Business and Community Centre will be constructed on 0.42 hectares of informal open space of which there is already an over-provision in the local catchment area. As such, it will not create a shortage of informal open space within the local area nor will it impact on the level of formal open space. Part of the open space is still retained adjacent to the application site and moreover, it is considered that the natural surveillance generated by the proposed development may promote increased use of this space by the wider community. There is no loss of mature trees nor is there any loss of an area of open space of City wide importance. Whilst the proposed development is not ancillary to the open space and not in accordance with Policy CS47 (h) of the Core Strategy, the provision of a community facility at the ground floor fronting the open space will enhance its use and is compatible with the sites informal recreation function. Failure to comply with Policy CS47 (h) alone is not considered sufficient to warrant refusal of the application as the proposal is deemed to comply with the remaining objectives of Policy CS47 and Policy CS45 of the Core Strategy, Policy LR5 of the UDP and guidance within PPG17.

Design and appearance of the proposed development

Policy BE5 of the UDP relates to building design and siting and advises that good design and the use of good quality materials will be expected in all new developments. It seeks to achieve original architecture and a design on a human scale with varied materials that break down the overall mass of development. Policy CS74 of the SDF Core Strategy, which relates to design principles, advises that high-quality development will be expected, which would respect, take advantage of and enhance the distinctive features of the city, its districts and neighbourhoods.

157

The main proposed building is intentionally designed to be robust and durable because of its location within an area of public open space. The surrounding area does not demonstrate any clear architectural styles or buildings of particular merit as they comprise relatively modern and simple residential dwellings as well as the existing Business Centre and Nursery. As such, the key intention of this application is to deliver a high quality building of visual interest that addresses the site’s location within an area of open space.

In this case, the principal feature of the external appearance of the development is the casing of the building within a metal mesh, which provides a frame for the installation of a ‘green wall’ to each elevation. The mesh will support climbing plants that respond to the conditions of each elevation in terms of the level of sunlight and exposure to wind etc. It will also provide an opportunity for wildlife. The applicant has advised that a range of plants will be selected that are hardy and appropriate to the site, which might include Virginia Creeper, Ivy, Climbing Hydrangea, the Climbing Rose, Sweet Pea and Wisteria. They will be planted in pits around the building and irrigated until they are established.

Whilst the principle of a green wall is welcomed and considered appropriate to this building within an area of open space, the Council must be satisfied that it is achievable and sustainable in terms of its future maintenance. The Council sought and received further information from the applicant to determine the location and depth of planting pits and means to protect the plants from undue damage. This is covered by condition 8.

Notwithstanding that the applicant has selected climbing plants that will grow quickly over the façade, there is clearly an interim period and it is important to consider the building without the green wall. In this regard, it is acknowledged that the construction of the proposed development in block work at ground level with the upper levels constructed in powder metal composite panels is relatively simple in form and appearance. These elements will then be layered with the installation of the metal mesh. Metal mesh can be regarded as a high quality material and in this case, will provide durability. Moreover, it is considered that the layering of the materials is inventive and will provide some depth to the facades. The applicant also proposes to use coloured metal panels and painted block work to soften these materials and create a warmer, less monochrome appearance. Subject to securing samples of the materials and approving the colour of the metal panels and block work, it is considered that this palette of materials will create an interesting façade treatment that will be furthered softened by the planting, which is appropriate to the sites location within an area of open space. On this basis, the design and external appearance is in accordance with Policy BE5 of the UDP and Policy CS74 of the Core Strategy.

The scale of development of the main block extends from two storeys to a maximum of three storeys towards the front eastern elevation, fronting onto the public open space; this equates to a maximum eaves height of 10.4 metres. Towards the rear, the building reduces to two storeys, which takes into account the sloping topography of the site and reduces the eaves height to approximately 5.8 metres. It is considered that this massing of development in not inappropriate in

158 this locality with the higher massing facing onto the area of open space and then reducing in height towards the rear in proximity to existing residential properties. Moreover, the proposed building introduces full height glazing and incorporates generous openings to the front elevation in particular, which will provide natural surveillance of the public footpath and ensure that the building is of a human scale and integrates with the surrounding area. It is therefore concluded that the scale of development and its orientation toward the public footpath is in accordance with Policy BE5 of the UDP and Policy CS74 of the Core Strategy and will ensure a high-quality development that will enhance the character of the neighbourhood and promote greater use of the open space.

With regard to the small extension to the existing Alison Crescent Business Centre, to re-provide the toilet block that will be demolished to enable the construction of the access road, it is considered that this extension will continue the form and scale of the existing building, which is appropriate. Its treatment in the same metal mesh as the main building, to allow the creation of a green wall, is also appropriate to establish the link between the existing phase of the Business Centre and the new phase. Accordingly, this is also in accordance with Policy BE5 of the UDP and Policy CS74 of the Core Strategy.

Highways issues

This application was the subject of extensive pre-application discussion in respect of the relationship of the proposed development to the existing public footpath that runs from Alison Crescent through the public open space and into the estate. The applicant initially hoped to close the footpath and was requested to undertake a survey of footpath use. This demonstrated that the footpath was moderately well used, particularly during the day (9am and 6pm) with the route from Vikinglea Road to the main footpath between the Nursery and the Business Centre being particularly busy. The applicant was advised that major changes or extinguishment of the footpath could not be justified.

Following further analysis, the applicant determined that the only viable means of access to the proposed development was to utilise the access from the existing Business Centre (Phase 2) from Alison Crescent and to construct a new link road to the new car park to the rear of the proposed main building. This could technically be achieved either at grade or via a bridge link. This application incorporates the latter on the grounds that the applicant did not consider that an at- grade link across the public footpath could be safely achieved, particularly given the proximity of the Nursery and the moderate use of the footpath by visitors to the Nursery. It is principally for this reason that a bridge link across the footpath is proposed.

The bridge is designed as a private single carriageway link with pedestrian and cycle facilities that provides controlled access into the car park to the rear. It is single width to reduce the span across the footpath. The original submission indicated the use of a cattle grid surface to the bridge to allow light to penetrate onto the public footpath. However, the Council’s Highways Officer considered this unacceptable and a standard asphalt road surface is now proposed, which also

159 addresses the concerns of residents in respect of the noise impact of the previously proposed ‘cattle-grid’ surface.

The Council’s Highways Officer has advised that there is no objection on the grounds of highway safety to the construction of the bridge, subject to the submission of structural calculations to ensure that it is appropriately built in relation to the footpath below. This will be required as a condition of this recommendation. It is also considered that the surrounding highways are capable of accommodating the level of additional traffic that will arise from the proposed development, utilising the access from the existing Business Centre.

From a highways perspective, it is also relevant to consider the effect of development on the footpath. At the present time, the footpath extends through an area of open space and to the rear of the existing Business Centre and the Nursery. These buildings do not present an attractive façade to the open space and do not create a sense that the space is well overlooked. Part of the reasoning for the location of the proposed development on this part of the open space is to address this issue by presenting a strong façade to the public footpath and open space, with generous window openings to promote natural surveillance. It is considered that the proposal is successful in this regard but is sufficiently set back from the footpath by a distance of between 3.6 metres (minimum) and 8.8 metres (maximum) that the building does not appear over-bearing for users of the footpath.

With regard to parking provision, the application proposes 28 spaces to the rear of the main building. The most up-to-date parking standards relevant to this application are set out in the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Spatial Strategy (May 2008), which determines that the maximum parking standard for B1 use within a regional city is 1 space per 60 square metres above a threshold of 2500 square metres. This application proposes 1410 square metres of B1 space and is therefore below the threshold for which maximum parking standards apply. The RSS parking standard threshold for non-residential institutions is also 2500 square metres, which is significantly higher than the 150 square metres of community space proposed as part of this application. Accordingly, the proposed level of development is below the threshold to which the RSS parking standards are applicable and they are therefore not relevant in this instance.

However, Policy T22 of the UDP is still applicable, which relates to ‘Private Car Parking in New Development’. The supporting text to Policy T22 advises that controlling levels of private parking provision is a means of discouraging peak-hour commuting by car and where public transport is good, levels of private parking within new development can be regulated to discourage peak-hour commuting into this area. In this case, the provision of 28 car parking spaces is considered appropriate to serve the 19 workshops in accordance with Policy T22. With regard to servicing, it is anticipated that the units will only require servicing by small vans, although capacity is also incorporated for refuse vehicles. There is sufficient space within the car park to accommodate these vehicles and the hours of servicing will be controlled by means of a planning condition. On this basis, the level of parking and provision for servicing vehicles is satisfactory subject to conditions to ensure that the car parking spaces are provided as shown prior to the commencement of

160 use, as well as conditions requiring details of cycle parking, hours of servicing and the development of a travel plan to encourage travel by means other than the private car.

Accessibility

Policy BE8 of the UDP relates to access to workplaces and advises that in all developments that would result in the provision of 20 or more jobs, suitable access arrangements will be promoted especially for public reception areas and toilet facilities, to meet the needs of employees and members of the public with disabilities.

The applicant has submitted an Access Statement, which confirms that the development seeks to meet, if not exceed, the requirements of Building Regulations Part M, which applies to access for all. The Statement also confirms that disabled parking will be positioned close to the main entrance and all units will be accessible from the ground floor or by lift. These proposals are considered sufficient in principle to accord with Policy BE8 but a condition is also proposed to seek further details to confirm means of disabled access to and within the building.

Impact on the amenity of adjoining residential occupiers

The issues in respect of the impact of the proposed development upon the amenity of nearby residential occupiers are considered to be three-fold; (i) the physical relationship of the development to the adjoining dwellings on Normancroft Way and Normancroft Drive, (ii) noise and disturbance arising from the development and (iii) safety and security for residents. Each is assessed in turn below.

With regard to the built form relationship between the proposed main building and the existing dwellings, the application site boundary adjoins the rear gardens of dwellings at 23, 25, 32 and 34 Normancroft Drive and Nos. 52, 54, 56, 58 and 60 Normancroft Way. These comprise mostly two storey dwellings as well as a bungalow. In terms of their relationship, the proposed building is positioned a minimum of 31 metres from the rear façade of the dwellings at 52-60 Normancroft Way and a distance of between 22 metres and 25 metres from the properties at 34 and 25 Normancroft Drive, with the latter also being at an oblique angle.

In terms of scale, the application includes the submission of a cross-section through the east elevation of the building in relation to 58 Normancroft Way and a cross-section at an oblique angle between the proposed development and 25 Normancroft Drive, which is a bungalow. The cross-section to Normancroft Way suggests that the proposed development is approximately 2 metres higher at eaves level than the eaves of No.58 at a distance of 31 metres. The cross-section to Normancroft Drive illustrates that the new building is approximately 3.5 metres above the eaves level of the bungalow at a distance of more than 30 metres and at an oblique angle.

The Council do not have any published amenity standards in terms of the relationship between commercial and residential properties. However, it is perhaps reasonable to note that for residential properties, the Council require a minimum of

161 21 metres between primary windows to protect privacy. Where any proposed residential development is higher than existing dwellings, the Council would generally seek an increase in the distance. It is also the case that the Council may accept a reduced standard where two or more dwellings have windows that are not directly facing each other but angled away from180°.

Using this guidance as a broad parameter, it is considered reasonable to conclude that a minimum of 31 metres between the rear façade of the dwellings at 52-60 Normancroft Way and the proposed development is sufficient to ensure that there would be no undue detriment, in planning terms, to the amenity of these residents by virtue of loss of privacy. It is accepted that the development may affect their views but there is presently no right to a view within the planning system and it cannot therefore be considered as grounds for refusal.

With regard to the properties at Normancroft Drive, including No.25, it is clearly the case that these properties are also positioned significantly more than 21 metres from the proposed development and at an oblique angle. On this basis, it is therefore concluded that the proposal would not be unduly detrimental to their residential amenity by virtue of loss of privacy or light to warrant refusal of this application.

In respect of noise and disturbance, it is accepted that the proposed development will result in greater activity in the area to the rear of the adjoining boundaries than presently exists. However, it is relevant to determine whether the development will create such disturbance to their amenity to warrant refusal of the proposal. In this case, the application proposes workshops within Use Class B1 and a community facility fronting onto the area of public open space, which is positioned on the front elevation and away from the residential dwellings. The main issue is therefore the relationship to the proposed workshops and the impact of the car park. The definition of a B1 use is a use that can be carried out in any residential area without detriment to the amenity of that area by reason of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, soot, ash, dust or grit. As such, the operations that occur within the development must not create a noise disturbance that would be detrimental to the residential area and the principle of a workshop and community space in this location is therefore considered acceptable. It is acknowledged, however, that entry to the building and to the car park is positioned at the rear of the development adjacent to the residential gardens; this issue has been addressed in two ways.

Firstly, the proposal incorporates a landscaped buffer strip between the gardens and the car park; this extends to a depth of 2.8 metres along the boundaries with 52-58 Normancroft Way, which more directly adjoin the car park and 2 metres to the rear of dwellings on Normandcroft Drive, which adjoin the site but are further from the car parking spaces and main entrance. This will be maintained by the applicant and is sufficiently deep to provide both tree and shrub planting.

Additionally, it is proposed to control the hours of use of the building. The applicant has advised within the application that they seek to operate between the following times:

B1 Use: 0745 to 1930 on Mondays to Saturdays and 0900 to 1800 on Sundays

162

D1 Use: 0745 to 2200 on Mondays to Fridays, 0745 to 1930 on Saturdays and 0900 to 1800 on Sundays.

It is the view of Officers that the proposed use of the B1 units between 0745 and 1930 during the week is reasonable. However, the proposed hours of use on Saturdays and Sundays are of concern given the close proximity of the car park to the adjoining residential dwellings and the location of the turning area for service vehicles in particular. Whilst it is appreciated that the applicant seeks flexibility in the hours of use of the units to attract future occupiers, it is also necessary to balance the amenity of existing residents. It is therefore considered that whilst it is acceptable for the workshops to open on a Saturday, the applicant’s proposed hours are not acceptable and should be restricted to 0745 to 1300 on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

Similarly, whilst the community facility is intended to attract users from the local community such that local residents may choose to walk via the front entrance facing the open space rather than drive to the centre using the rear of the building, it is considered that the proposed hours of use between 0900 to 1800 on Sundays does not have sufficient regard for local residents. As such, it is considered that more appropriate hours of use for the community facility would be between 1000 and 1700 on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

These restrictions are secured by means of a planning condition.

With regard to safety and security, the public consultation exercise highlighted a number of concerns from the local community in respect of the impact of the proposed development on security and anti-social behaviour in the locality, with particular regard to the following:

- The area below the bridge is likely to be an attraction point for youths; - The development will displace the current location of anti-social behaviour behind the nursery to the area behind the houses; - The area to the rear of the properties on Normancroft Drive will now be secluded, which will give advantage to burglars; - The alternative areas of open space are not always accessible to younger children and are often areas of anti-social behaviour.

In response to these concerns, the applicant consulted the South Yorkshire Police (SYP) Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO) at pre-application stage and the ALO was also consulted in the course of the application. SYP raise no objection to the proposal in terms of either the bridge or the boundary treatment. Indeed, with regard to the former, the ALO advises that he does not feel the bridge will have a negative impact in relation to safety and security for members of the public using the footpath; this is principally on the grounds that there are good sight lines and provided the path is illuminated during hours of darkness, it is the view of the ALO that the construction of the bridge should not generate crime. South Yorkshire Police have also advised that the level of crime and anti-social behaviour in this part of the Manor Estate is not considered particularly problematic from their perspective and is not a ‘hot-spot’ for anti-social behaviour. Moreover, as outlined

163 above, it is anticipated that the location of this development will result in informal surveillance of the remaining area of open space such that it should be more accessible to younger children than presently perceived.

In terms of the secluded boundaries to the rear of properties on Normancroft Drive and Normancroft Way, it is advised that the landscaped buffer zones will be densely landscaped and can be defensively planted to discourage unwanted access. Moreover, access into the car park area will be strictly controlled such that the boundary is more secure than the present situation where they adjoin an area of public open space. It is therefore concluded that the proposed development will not be unduly detrimental to the safety and security of existing residents.

In conclusion, it is considered that whilst the proposed development will clearly alter the character of the open space and the relationship of adjoining residents to that space, it can be constructed without undue disturbance to their residential amenity or to the safety and security and is therefore considered acceptable.

Landscape design

The proposed development will result in the loss of 14 trees that are presently sited within the area of open space of which 4 have already been removed. The application indicates that a new landscaped boundary will be created and although not developed in detail, it may also include a new natural play area that could incorporate climbing boulders to encourage active play. The detail of the landscape design is to be secured by means of a planning condition.

The Council’s Landscape Officer has advised that the group of trees likely to be affected by the development is made up of a mix of dense shrubs and mixed trees. Whilst not considered to be in particularly good condition, it is noted that it provides vegetation in an area where planting might otherwise be difficult to establish and it does contribute to the landscape in a positive way. Accordingly, as part of the detailed landscape scheme, the Council will require their equal replacement and a suitably high quality landscape scheme and long-term management plan as part of the condition details. On this basis, the landscape proposals are considered acceptable.

Sustainability

Policy CS64 of the Core Strategy relates to climate change, resources and sustainable design of developments and advises that all new buildings and conversions of existing buildings must be designed to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and function in a changing climate. They must also be designed to use resources sustainably. The supporting text to CS64 advises that to satisfy the policy, all new non-residential developments over 500 square metres should achieve a BREEAM rating of very good (or equivalent). The applicant has confirmed in writing that the building is, in any event, being designed to meet the BREEAM Very Good rating, which will be secured by means of a planning condition. The development is therefore in accordance with Policy CS64.

164 Policy CS65 of the Core Strategy, which relates to renewable energy and carbon reduction, applies to both new buildings and conversions and requires all significant developments to secure the following, unless it can be shown not to be feasible or viable:

(i) Provide a minimum of 10% of the predicted energy needs from decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy AND (ii) generate further renewable or low carbon energy or incorporate design measures sufficient to reduce the development's overall predicted carbon dioxide emissions by 20%. This would include the decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy required to satisfy (i).

The applicant has submitted a Draft Preliminary Energy Statement, which provides a preliminary assessment of the building’s carbon emissions and an analysis of construction methods proposed to achieve a reduction in emissions as well as a full assessment of the renewable energies available to achieve the requirements of Policy CS65.

In terms of renewable energy, the statement concludes that a biomass boiler is likely to be economically feasible and capable of contributing to a significant carbon dioxide reduction such that biomass heating is included within the proposal. Solar hot water has also been included on the basis that the building has a relatively low annual domestic hot water demand and it has an open aspect to the south. It is also the case that the building is naturally ventilated and constructed using high performance materials. It is therefore concluded that the applicant has sufficiently demonstrated an ability to achieve the requirements of Policy CS65, which will also be secured by means of a planning condition.

Public Art

Policy BE12 of the UDP advises that the provision of works of public art, which can be readily seen by the public, will be encouraged as an integral part of the design of major developments. In this case, it is proposed as a condition of this application to secure a piece of public art that is visible to the open space.

Regeneration Impacts

Although not directly relevant to the assessment of this planning application, it may be helpful for Members to understand the aspirations of the applicant, Manor Development Company and their requirement to expand the existing business.

The Manor Development Company was established in 1992 to respond to the area’s economic decline and high levels of unemployment. Their stated aim is to help to improve the local economy and the area's image in general and they principally seek to provide affordable managed workspace to new and small businesses with support administrative, facilities management and payroll services. Indeed, MDC has recently been granted charitable status.

Within the existing Alison Business Centre facilities there are presently 37 businesses of which 21 are starter businesses. Eleven of these are local with 8

165 from within a 2-mile radius and 3 from within a 4-mile radius. Within 26 of the businesses that were surveyed in August 2009, they employed 112 people of which 30% were employed by non-local businesses. The applicant considers that this supports the need to encourage larger and medium sized private businesses into the area that in return can support local employment and therefore widen the opportunities for employment and self employment within the Manor Ward.

In terms of occupancy, MDC confirm that as of August 2009, the existing business space was 88% occupied and is typically let at an average rental charge of £14 per square foot. The occupancy figure includes an area of 3 workshop units within the existing Phase 2 that are presently not made available for letting as they are intended to accommodate businesses presently located within the part of Phase 2 that will be affected by the need to form the gatehouse for this application. Taking this into account, the occupancy rate is presently at 91% as of August 09. MDC advise that the remaining empty units are a direct result of the economic climate and principally a result of its effect on the building and allied trades sector. However, they advise that MDC has eleven active leads for businesses requiring premises of which seven require 400-1000 sq foot and three needing 200 sq foot or below, illustrating that there is demand for additional space.

Furthermore, the need to expand the Business Centre is two fold: the extension will provide additional and modern business space of an appropriate size that can build upon and share the facilities already established within Phase 2 such that MDC do not have to expend additional capital to replicate the facilities management already available within Phase 2. This capital can be utilised more effectively by MDC within the community e.g. in providing the supporting community facility and ensuring that the proposed business space is competitively priced and flexible. Additionally, the provision of Phase 3 as proposed in this application, will enable MDC to provide an expanded range of services and contribute to a higher level of revenue and an improved offer to small and medium size enterprises. This additional net revenue can be used to fund planned maintenance to improve the existing facilities, which will ensure the long-term viability of MDC and the provision of flexible and reasonably priced business space for starter businesses within the local area.

The development of this application will principally be funded through the Local Enterprise Growth Initiative.

RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS

It is considered that the issues raised by the objections to this application in terms of the relationship of the residential dwellings to the proposed development, the impact on their amenity, anti-social behaviour issues and traffic and highway issues have been fully addressed in the report above.

It is however, relevant to note that some residents on Normancroft Way and Normancroft Drive raised concerns that they presently have a gate on their rear boundary that provides access to the open space, which will be lost as a result of this application. Acis Group Limited manages all these houses and no evidence

166 has been submitted to demonstrate that there is an established or legal right of way for these residents onto the open space.

The resident at 25 Normancroft Way was particularly concerned about the loss of this rear access in terms of a secondary means of escape in the event of fire. The applicant has consulted South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service and Building Regulations to confirm that there is no statutory requirement for a secondary fire exit and the development does not impact upon statutory fire regulations. However, following further discussion with Acis, it has been agreed that there is scope within the present layout to transfer a 1.1 metre strip of the site to the rear of 23 and 25 Normancroft Drive into the ownership of Acis; this strip can provide a footway to connect with an existing footpath adjoining 23 Normancroft Drive, which will provide the occupier of No.25 Normancroft Drive with a secondary access in any event. Although not a legal requirement, it has been secured in order to alleviate the particular concerns and circumstances of the occupier of No.25. The transfer will comprise a private arrangement between the applicant and Acis. This arrangement is shown on the submitted plans.

In response to a concern from Councillor Wilson about noise during construction, it is relevant to note that a condition is proposed that requires details of the location and extent of the site compound and how it will be accessed, to ensure some control over this aspect of the development. A directive is also incorporated to remind the applicant of the need to comply with the Control of Pollution Act 1974. As a general rule, where residential occupiers are likely to be affected, it is expected that noisy works of demolition and construction will be carried out during normal working hours, i.e. 0800 to 1800 hours Monday to Friday, and 0800 to 1300 hours on Saturdays with no working on Sundays or Public Holidays.

Finally, it is noted that the local residents have raised some issues about the pre- application consultation process undertaken by the applicant although it is understood that public meetings were held for residents prior to the submission of the application. Furthermore, as part of the statutory planning process, letters were sent to 219 individual properties and a public meeting was also held. As such, it is considered that local residents have had sufficient opportunity to consider the application and to submit comments.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

This application proposes the construction of a 1 x 3 storey building to provide an extension to the Alison Business Centre comprising the provision of 1410 square metres of new workspace units within Use Class B1 (Business) and a new community facility extending to 150 square metres. It also proposes to modify the existing Alison Business Centre to enable the construction of the new access road and a new gatehouse building that will effectively link the two sites. These works will require the demolition of the existing toilet block, which forms part of the courtyard elevation facing the nursery and the single storey extension of the existing building by a length of 8.2 metres towards Vikinglea Road. Car parking for the new main block is provided to the rear of the building with access from the existing Business Centre via a metal bridge that over sails the footpath by a

167 minimum height of 2.2 metres. This bridge is a single carriageway and includes a pedestrian and cycle facility such that it extends to 5 metres in width.

The development is located within an area of informal public open space. However, the Council’s Open Space Assessment demonstrates that there is already an over-provision of informal space in the local catchment area and as such, it will not create a further shortage within the local area nor will it impact on the level of formal open space, of which there is a slight under-provision in the area. Furthermore, part of the open space is still retained adjacent to the application site and moreover, it is considered that the natural surveillance generated by the proposed development may promote increased use of this space by the wider community. There is no loss of mature trees nor is there any loss of an area of open space of City wide importance. The application is therefore considered to sufficiently comply with the objectives of Policy CS47 and Policy CS45 of the Core Strategy, Policy LR5 of the UDP and guidance within PPG17.

Architecturally, the proposed facility is designed to be durable and secure. It is constructed in simple block work at ground level with the upper floors constructed in powder metal composite panels. These ‘backing’ materials will be coloured to create a softer façade. The building will then be clad entirely in an expanded metal mesh screen, which will allow climbing plants to grow over it to green the façade. The scale of development addresses the topography of the site such that it is three storeys to the front flank adjoining the footpath and the existing business centre and then reduces to two storeys towards the rear adjacent to the existing residential properties. It is concluded that the proposed treatment will create an interesting façade treatment that will be softened by the green wall planting, which is appropriate to the sites location within an area of open space in accordance with Policy BE5 of the UDP and Policy CS74 of the Core Strategy.

In terms of transport and highways, the application incorporates a car park that provides 28 vehicle spaces and a turning area for light vans. This provision is considered sufficient to serve the workshop units and this level of traffic can readily be accommodated within the existing highway network utilising the existing access from Alison Crescent. There is also no highway objection to the construction of the bridge.

Finally, the applicant has submitted sufficient information to confirm that the development can comply with the sustainable objectives of Policies CS64 and CS65 and it is also considered that a landscape plan and maintenance strategy can be secured by means of a planning condition to ensure an appropriate quality and form of landscaping and its long-term care.

The proposed development is therefore considered to comply with relevant national and local planning policy and is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

168

Case Number 09/01676/CHU

Application Type Planning Application for Change of Use

Proposal Use of car showroom (Sui Generis) as retail convenience store (Use Class A1)

Location Former Hatfields Garages Ltd Abbeydale Road South Sheffield S17 3LH

Date Received 29/05/2009

Team SOUTH

Applicant/Agent DLP Planning Ltd

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act.

2 The development shall not be begun until the improvements (which expression shall include traffic control, pedestrian and cycle safety measures) to the highways listed below have either;

a) been carried out; or

b) details have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority of arrangements which have been entered into which will secure that such improvement works will be carried out before the development is brought into use.

Highway Improvements:

- Signalisation of Abbeydale Road South/Twentywell Lane junction - Abbeydale Road South along site frontage - Traffic Regulations Orders (Prohibition of loading)

To enable the above-mentioned highways to accommodate the increase in traffic, which, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, will be generated by the development.

169 3 Prior to the improvement works indicated in the preceding condition being carried out, full details of these improvement works shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

4 The retail store shall not be used unless all redundant access have been permanently stopped up and reinstated to footway and kerb, and means of vehicular access shall be restricted solely to those access points indicated in the approved plans.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

5 The retail store shall not be used unless the car parking accommodation for 16 cars as shown on the approved plans has been provided in accordance with those plans and thereafter such car parking accommodation shall be retained for the sole purpose intended.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

6 The retail store shall not be used unless provision has been made within the site for accommodation of delivery/service vehicles in accordance with the approved plan. Thereafter, all such areas shall be retained free of all obstructions, including the storage, display and depositing of materials, packaging or other objects so that the service yard is fully available for the parking, turning and manoeuvring of delivery/service vehicles.

In the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the locality.

7 Before the development is commenced, full details of suitable and sufficient cycle parking accommodation within the site shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the retail store shall not be used unless such cycle parking has been provided in accordance with the approved plans and, thereafter, such cycle parking accommodation shall be retained.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

8 Prior to any works commencing on site full details of the following shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the construction shall only be progressed in accordance with the approved details:

(a) Construction method statement (b) Site safety (c) Location of the site compound and temporary car parking arrangements for contractors (d) Details of any temporary Traffic Regulation Orders

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

170

9 Before the development is brought into use details of a servicing management plan shall be submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority and all servicing of the development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed plan.

In the interests of the safety of road users.

10 The gross retail floorspace of this development shall be limited to a maximum of 300 square metres.

In order to protect the vitality and viability of neighbouring shopping areas in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 6.

11 A minimum of 50% of the retail stores sales area shall be allocated to the sale of convenience goods.

In order to define the permission.

12 All externally mounted plant, equipment and machinery shall be designed to achieve a noise level of 10dB below the background noise levels when measured as a LA90 at the site boundary.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

13 The retail store shall be used for the above-mentioned purpose only between 0700 hours and 2200 hours on any day.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

14 Deliveries to the store shall only take place between 0700 hours and 2200 hours on any day.

In the interests of the amenities of the locality and occupiers of adjoining property.

15 The development must be carried out in complete accordance with the following approved plans:

YK1377T Fig 3-02 YK1377T Fig 4-01 YK1377T Fig 5-01 YK1377T Fig 6-01

Unless otherwise authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to define the permission.

171 16 The retail store shall not be used unless a level threshold has been provided to the entrance thereto in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter such level threshold shall be retained.

To ensure ease of access and facilities for disabled persons at all times.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

H10 - Development in Housing Areas H14 - Conditions on Development in Housing Areas PPS6 - Planning for Town Centres PPG13 - Transport CS39 - Neighbourhood Centres CS67 - Flood Risk Management

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

1. The applicant is advised that it will be necessary to enter into a Legal Agreement under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980 and as such is asked to contact Helen Johnson. Tel: 0114 2736131

172 Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application site is a former car showroom with customer car parking located close to the junction of Abbeydale Road South and Twentywell Lane. This is now disused and vacant. There are two buildings on the site, the most visible being a flat roofed former car showroom which has been vacant for about 3 years. The exterior is mainly glazing, now boarded up, between white pillars with a dark brown fascia above. There is also an entrance feature facing Abbeydale Road South. There is a second single storey building with a flat roof located between the former showroom and Twentywell Lane. This is a storey lower than the showroom and faces towards the rear of the site. This is served by an access road that runs from the car park on the site frontage around the south side of the former showroom to serve the lower level of the second building and the basement of the showroom. It appears that these spaces have in the past, been used for storage and office space ancillary to the showroom use. There is car parking along the entire site frontage and also between the two buildings. Vehicle access is taken from

173 Abbeydale Road South. Also, there are mature trees around all sides apart from the Abbeydale Road South frontage.

The site fronts onto Abbeydale Road South which is lined by mature trees at this point. At one side, to the north, is Twentywell Lane with flats beyond. Across Abbeydale Road South are houses and Abbeydale Sports Club. To the rear is the River Sheaf with more flats beyond and to the south is more housing.

This application proposes a change of use from a car showroom (sui generis use) to a retail convenience store (Use Class A1). 16 car parking spaces are proposed.

REPRESENTATIONS

1 letter of support has been received with 14 letters of objection on the following grounds:

- There would be problems caused by delivery lorries and customer cars arriving at the same time. This is a restricted site. - There are queues of traffic already at the junction of Abbeydale Road South and Twentywell Lane, particularly at peak periods and this proposal would make this situation much worse. - There is not enough car parking at the site and there would be on-street customer parking. - Delivery vehicles would cause problems to the surrounding road network, blocking traffic and causing congestion. - The traffic report submitted with the application is not realistic as there would be more vehicle trips than stated. - There would be no pedestrian facilities provided to increase safety crossing the roads. There would be more traffic making crossing more difficult. - There would be extra noise disturbing local residents. - There is no need for another convenience store in this area as there is already a Tesco Express 700 metres away at Totley. - The proposal would have a detrimental impact on existing shops at the top of Twentywell Lane. - It would be better to use the site as a car park for Dore Station to ease the pressure on the bottom of Dore Road, which is where train commuters park now. - Very few people would walk to the store and the vast majority would arrive by car.

Dore Village Society object to the application.

- No details on how the site is to operate have been provided. - Strong concerns about the provision and arrangement of customer car parking, storage of waste material and on site delivery arrangements. - The former car showroom caused traffic congestion because delivery lorries parked on Abbeydale Road South and there should not be a repeat of this.

174 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

84/02351/FUL Use of premises as a showroom and store for household, kitchen and bathroom fittings. Refused on 2 January 1985.

89/02579/FUL Use of showroom as a restaurant and provision of car parking. Withdrawn on 14 May 1990.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Land Use Policy

The adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP) shows that the site is within a housing policy area. Policy H10 says that housing is the preferred use but small shops are also acceptable and the policy justification explains that a small shop has no more than 280 square metres of sales floorspace. The net trading area of the proposal would be 240 square metres so the principal of the proposal does appear to be acceptable. However this policy, as it relates to retail uses, has been superseded by national guidance contained in PPS6: Planning for Town Centres. This will be examined in the section Retail Impact, later in this report.

Layout and External Appearance

The proposal is to change the use from a car showroom to an A1 retail store. The application is for change of use only with no new physical development, but the existing entrance canopy would be removed. The existing car showroom is about 300 square metres in area and the net trading area would be 240 square metres. The sales area would, therefore, be located level with Abbeydale Road South in the existing car showroom. The remaining areas, notably the basement level beneath the showroom and the building in the northern part of the site provide potential for storage and ancillary functions associated with the principal use.

There are currently three points of access into the site, all off Abbeydale Road South and it is proposed to block off the northerly one, which is close to the junction with Twentywell Lane. The remaining two, at the centre and the southern end, would remain to serve the customer car park and the service vehicles which would deliver at the rear of the site, thus avoiding any interference with customer parking or the free flow of traffic on Abbeydale Road South.

There would be no additional development on the site beyond the change of use of the existing buildings. The existing mature landscaping at the rear and sides of the site would not be affected and the low level shrub planting and ground cover along the site frontage would be retained.

The site has been vacant and disused for about three years and its neglected appearance with boarded windows distracts from the visual quality of the immediate locality. Purely in terms of appearance, the return of this building into an active use would improve the area.

175

Transport, Parking and Access

Policy H14 of the UDP sets out the conditions on development in housing areas and this states that there should be safe access to the highway network, appropriate off-street parking and pedestrians should not be endangered.

PPG13 – Transport – encourages developers to promote sustainable travel patterns by reducing the need to travel by car and ensuring that sites are well served by public transport or are easily accessible by walking or cycling.

The issues of traffic levels, parking and deliveries are raised in nearly all the representations submitted about this application and are clearly of concern to local residents.

The parking and access arrangements as originally submitted can be summarised as follows:

- the main vehicle access point is located centrally off Abbeydale Road South and this would be retained as it leads directly to the central parking area. - The secondary vehicle access point close to the Twentywell Lane junction would be closed off. - The third access point at the southern end would be retained. - A one-way customer parking system would operate with vehicles entering the site through the central access and leaving at the south corner of the site. - A total of eleven customer parking spaces are proposed in the central area. - Servicing and deliveries would be done by vehicles up to 10.7 metres in length, which would include articulated vehicles, which would use the same entry and exit points as customers but use the rear access road currently serving the rear of the site, which is at a lower level. This would avoid conflict with customers and the free flow of traffic on Abbeydale Road South. In the event of service vehicles having to use the car park, enough space would exist between parked cars to allow a 10.7 metre long vehicle to do a three point turn.

The application in this form was considered to be unacceptable in highway terms, for the following reasons:

- The servicing arrangements were convoluted and result in a number of conflicts within the site. - Problems already exist with right turning vehicles into Twentywell Lane and the proposal would exacerbate this to an unacceptable level. - Pedestrian crossings would be essential to ensure pedestrian safety. - The parking guidelines indicate that between 12 and 18 on-site spaces should be provided, rather than 11 as proposed. Any on-street parking would be unacceptable.

176 It is considered that the most important of the above-mentioned issues is the impact of increased traffic and right turning movements into the site so close to the Twentywell Lane junction. The applicant, in response to the above, has agreed a number of highway and on-site amendments.

The applicant has agreed to provide or fund the signalisation of the Abbeydale Road South/Twentywell Lane junction. This would control traffic movement including right hand turns at this junction and also provide a safe pedestrian crossing at Abbeydale Road South and across the bottom of Twentywell Lane.

Traffic Regulation Orders would also be put in place along Abbeydale Road South to prevent people from parking, or delivering or unloading at the roadside.

There have been only two recorded accidents at the Abbeydale Road South/ Twentywell Lane junction and those were of a minor nature. It is likely that introduction of the signals would reduce the potential for accidents at this junction.

The parking layout would be amended to include an extra five spaces at the rear of the site, which would be for staff who would not be able to park in the customer facility at the front. This would total 16 spaces which falls at the top end of the range of 12 to 18 spaces specified in the Council’s Parking Guidelines which includes both staff and customers. Customers would not be able to park on Abbeydale Road South and this level of provision is considered to be acceptable.

It is also considered prudent to limit the sales area to the 240 square metres specified because if a consent was granted, there is potential to expand the retail floorspace into the basement or adjoining building. Additional floorspace is likely to result in additional customers placing pressure on car parking. This would be controlled by a condition.

With respect to the servicing arrangements, additional information has been submitted which sets out the following:

- Traffic Regulation Orders would prevent delivery vehicles parking in the road. - The goods delivery area would be at the rear, at a lower level, beneath the retail sales area, which would make it extremely difficult and time consuming for goods to be unloaded if the service lorry parked in front of the store. This would encourage deliveries at the lower level. - Companies that operate from premises such as this site are generally large organisations that have their own delivery vehicles that can easily be controlled in terms of instructions and delivery times, which could be controlled by a condition and be outside opening hours. - Information has already been provided that shows it is possible for delivery vehicles to access the rear of the site and park there.

It is considered that the above provides sufficient reassurance subject to a service management plan being submitted, that the servicing will be able to operate without compromising the free flow of traffic on Abbeydale Road South or customer car parking.

177

It is considered that the improvements that have been agreed by the applicant would resolve all highways, access and parking issues and this aspect of the application is acceptable.

Conditions are recommended that would ensure the amended parking scheme is implemented, cycle parking is provided and a service management plan is submitted.

Retail Impact

Relevant retail policies are set out in the UDP, Core Strategy and national guidance in the form of PPS6 – Planning for Town Centres.

Policy H10 of the UDP states that small A1 retail development (less than 280 square metres sales area) is acceptable in principle. However, Policy H10 must be read in conjunction with PPS6 which requires all retail proposals, including small ones, to satisfy the tests of need, sequential approach, scale accessibility and impact. So, even with a small proposal of 240 square metres, as in this application, these tests are necessary.

The adopted Core Strategy promotes sustainable neighbourhoods where people are happy to live, offering everyone a range of facilities and services and Policy CS39 encourages shops in neighbourhood centres. The application would improve the range of facilities in the area, but is not in a shopping area. The Core Strategy is, therefore, neutral to the proposal.

The five tests will be dealt with in turn:

Need

This is identified as quantative and qualitative. Quantative relates to whether the proposed retail floorspace can accommodate spending and qualitative is concerned with improving the distribution of shops in the city and encouraging consumer choice.

The applicant’s claim, in their supporting Planning and Retail Statement, that there is quantative need for this store because the store’s turnover would be less than the increase in spending in the store’s catchment area. Consequently, this application would contribute to satisfying the need for more floorspace. There were initial officer concerns that no account had been taken of whether existing floorspace is adequate to take up this spending increase. For example, it seems likely that Tesco at Abbeydale Drive and Sainsburys at Archer Road, which are outside the applicant’s catchment area, as shown in supporting information, contain enough floorspace to serve at least half the area. The applicant did not, initially, make allowance for increasing efficiencies in existing floorspace.

In response to this officer concern, further information was submitted demonstrating that there was need available to allow the development of two superstores, supported by a significant number of smaller stores, up until 2010.

178 The two superstores, Tesco and Sainsburys, are in place and this application is for a small store. The extra information also demonstrates that there is existing need well in excess of the expected turnover of the proposal.

Regarding increased efficiency of existing floorspace, if this was achieved, there would still be enough need to support the proposal. It is acknowledged that two new Tesco Express stores have recently opened at Broadfield Road and Totley but even with these, it is now accepted that, with the additional information, need has been demonstrated.

Sequential Approach

This test requires the applicant to carry out a search for alternative, available sites within the catchment area around the application site. The first preference is for a site within a shopping centre, secondly at the edge of a centre and finally, out of centre.

The vacant Parkhead garage site is within the catchment area and within a local centre but the applicant states that the refusal of planning permission on this site for a Tesco Express of similar size to this proposal suggests that the Parkhead site is not suitable. The applicant has demonstrated that no other sites within or at the edge of centre exist.

PPS6 requires that if there are no suitable, centrally located sites available, then out of centre sites which are well served by a choice of means of transport, close to a centre and have a high likelihood of forming links should be considered. In this instance, the application site is on an arterial route out of Sheffield, well served by buses with Dore Railway Station within 100 metres of the site.

The application, therefore, satisfies the sequential test.

Scale

The scale of the building in relation to the surroundings is acceptable and there would be no additional development on the site. Surrounding development and the mature trees along three boundaries would continue to dominate the application site.

Impact

PPS6 does not require an impact assessment on other centres for proposals of less than 2,500 square metres. The application is for 240 square metres of retail floorspace and well short of this threshold.

Accessibility

The Site is accessible by a choice of means of transport, as already explained and this meets the requirements of this test, as set our in PPS6.

179 The planning application meets the requirements of all five tests set out in PPS6. The proposal also meets the requirements of UDP and Core Strategy policies and there would be no reason to resist the application on the grounds of retail impact. Therefore, the proposal is acceptable in this respect.

Impact on the Amenities of Existing Residents

There are flats at the sides of the site and at the rear, but there is separation between these properties from the application site and the site is well screened by mature trees. There would not be any issue of loss of privacy and overlooking.

The site is located in an area of high background noise levels, principally traffic on Abbeydale Road South and Twentywell Lane and a busy railway line is close to the site, which generates high levels of noise.

The proposal would not generate significant levels of noise and disturbance. However, it is considered necessary to attach conditions relating to opening hours, delivery times and noise breakout from plant and machinery.

Flood Risk

The site lies close to the upper reaches of the River Sheaf and a Flood Risk Assessment has been carried out. Policy CS67 of the Core Strategy seeks to manage flood risk and in particular ensure that lives are not put at risk through developing on sites that have a high risk of flooding.

The Environment Agency Flood Map shows the lower level to be in Flood Zone 2 which is medium risk, with an annual probability of flooding between one and a hundred years and one in a thousand years. The upper level, where the retail area would be, falls in Flood Zone 1; little or no risk. Consequently, the area of circulation by the public would fall in Zone 1 whilst the area in Zone 2 would be for storage or ancillary use only.

There would, therefore, be no implications for flooding and no remediation required.

Disabled Access

There would be a requirement for the interior of the new store to be accessible for people with disabilities and for a level threshold to be required. The level threshold would be covered by a condition.

RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS

Many of the objections, particularly on highways grounds have already been examined earlier in this report but some responses are required.

It is considered that there would be little extra noise associated with the use, given that there is a significant amount of background noise from cars and trains already. There would be no extra disturbance to local residents.

180

The need for another convenience store at this location has been established by the Retail Impact Study submitted by the applicant.

There would not be a detrimental impact to shops on Twentywell Lane.

The proposed alternative use as a car park for Dore Station is noted, but this application has been assessed on its own merits.

Details of the site operations have been included in supporting information.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

This application relates to the vacant and neglected former Hatfields car showroom located at the junction of Abbeydale Road South and Twentywell Lane. It proposes a change of use from the showroom to A1 convenience store, the net retail floorspace being 240 square metres.

The applicant has confirmed that new traffic signals would be provided at the Abbeydale Road South/Twentywell Lane road junction, which would resolve the problem of right turning movements by vehicles and provide safe pedestrian crossing points. Traffic Regulation Orders would stop customer parking and deliveries along Abbeydale Road South at the site frontage. The car parking numbers have been increased within the site and delivery lorries can service the store at the rear, without compromising customer parking or the safe and free flow of traffic along Abbeydale Road South.

The applicant has submitted a Retail Impact Study along with additional information and this satisfies relevant policy criteria, particularly the tests set out in PPS6.

All other matters are either acceptable or resolved and all policy criteria is met. The proposal is, therefore, acceptable and recommended for conditional approval.

181

Case Number 09/01520/LBC

Application Type Listed Building Consent Application

Proposal Structural repairs and internal alterations to building to form apart-hotel (comprising of 40 units) (As amended 09/10/2009)

Location Haqqani House Vincent Road Sheffield S7 1BX

Date Received 18/05/2009

Team SOUTH

Applicant/Agent Tribal MJP

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Regulations 1990.

2 Before the development is commenced samples of all proposed external materials and finishes, including windows, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

3 Before the commencement of development large scale details, including materials and finishes, at a minimum of 1:20 scale of the items listed below shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

Doors Ridges, valleys, eaves and verges External wall construction Brickwork detailing Bell tower Entrance canopies Rainwater goods

182 Thereafter, the works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

4 Prior to commencement of works, details of the extent and specification of brick/stone repair and cleaning shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure that the fabric of the building is not damaged

5 Rooflights shall be conservation style whereby no part of the rooflight shall project above the surface of the roofing slates unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

6 All the rainwater gutters, downpipes and external plumbing shall be of cast iron or cast aluminium construction and painted black unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Gutters shall be fixed by means of hangers and brackets and no fascia boards shall be used.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

7 Before the commencement of development, the details, specifications and finish of the new windows, including elevations and sections, shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Drawings shall be of a minimum of 1:10 scale and shall include details of proposed section sizes at a minimum of 1:1 scale. (Details shall include: reveal depths, double glazing, secondary glazing, shutters, mouldings, architraves, location of trickle vents). Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

8 Before the development commences, details of the new internal floor structure and its abutment with the existing building structure shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

9 Before the development commences, details of the location, specification and appearance of all new services to the building (including meter boxes, outlets and inlets for gas, electricity, telephones, security systems, cabling, trunking, soil and vent stacks, fresh and foul water supply and runs, heating, air conditioning, ventilation, extract and odour control equipment, pipe runs and internal and external ducting) shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

183 In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

10 Before the development commences, details of installations and alterations arising from the requirements of fire protection, means of escape, acoustic attenuation and insulation, natural and mechanical ventilation, disabled access and the provision of natural and artificial lighting shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

11 Before the development commences, details of the design and appearance of boundary walls, gateways, steps and paths, hardstandings and other elements of the hard landscaping design shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

12 The existing boundary walls and railings shall be retained and details of the proposed treatment of any new access through the walls shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before work on site is commenced. Thereafter the treatment shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

13 The development must be carried out in complete accordance with the following approved documents,

Drawing numbers: 971-01-04 Rev C 971-01-05 Rev B 971-01-06 Rev B 971-01-07 Rev B Report on Facade Retention (Ref:R/10546/1) dated December 2008 and accompanying plan

Unless otherwise authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to define the permission.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

BE15 - Areas and Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest BE19 - Development affecting Listed Buildings CS74 - Design Principles

184

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

185 Site Location

INTRODUCTION

This application is accompanied by an application for planning permission (ref 09/01519/FUL). Consideration of this application should not be influenced by the recommendation related to the application for planning permission.

The application relates to a badly fire-damaged Grade II Listed Building. The building is understood to have been vacant for approximately 18 months prior to a serious fire in April 2008. It was last used as a Sufi Centre, had previously been a Christian Science Church and was originally a Methodist Church.

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The c.1890 building is located on a triangular site at the junction of Vincent Road with South View Road.

186 The large scale building is constructed in red brick and has a footprint of approximately 400m2. The building covers the majority of the site although there is an enclosed former garden area. It has principal elevations, including significant gables, to both road frontages and a feature 3 storey round corner tower where the highways meet. Only the external walls and steel beams which used to support the timber floors remain. The elevations are supported by scaffolding and temporary fencing has been erected in the highway to ensure public safety and site security.

Traditional Victorian two storey terraced dwellings dominate the surrounding area in a strong streetscape and adjoin the rear boundary of the site. There is an electricity substation immediately adjoining the site in South View Road.

The application is for the substantial rebuilding and conversion to form an apart- hotel with 40 rooms. The apart-hotel will comprise 24 studios, 12 flats and 4 rooms suitable for disabled occupancy. The accommodation is proposed to be laid out over 5 floors. In addition there will be a 24-hour reception area, launderette facility and ancillary stores. A garden area is proposed to the rear of the building and spaces for cycle parking, pool scooters, a pool car and single disabled parking space are also proposed.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

Applications for planning permission and listed building consent for an apart-hotel with 51 rooms were withdrawn in April 2009 (refs 09/00483/FUL and 09/00484/LBC).

Planning permission and listed building consent for alterations and extensions to the building to form 7 flats were granted in 2002 (refs 01/01669/FUL and 01/01670/LBC). Concurrent applications for conversion of the building for use as student accommodation (32 students) were also granted (refs 01/01659/FUL and 01/01660/LBC). These latter applications were effectively renewals of permissions that had been granted in 1996.

An application for use as a residential care home (Class C2) was withdrawn in 2000 (ref 98/00876/FUL).

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

No representations have been received that are specifically related to the impact on the historical/architectural merit of the building. The representations relate to planning issues and are reported under ref 09/01519/FUL.

English Heritage were consulted about the application. They have confirmed that they do not wish to comment and the application should be determined in accordance with national and local planning policies. No responses have been received from the 5 national amenity societies who were consulted about the application proposals.

187 The Conservation Advisory Group (CAG) commented on the original applications for 51 rooms (09/00483/FUL and 09/00484/LBC). The current applications only modify the internal layout and do not affect the structure or appearance of the building in a different way to the earlier applications. CAG’s comments were minuted as follows:

The Group welcomed the principle of development, particularly in the light of the present condition of the building. The Group requested the retention of the remaining historic fabric and features of the building and stated that there was a lack of detail in respect of the proposals regarding the fenestration. The Group also indicated that it would wish to have an oversight of how the new building was to be developed.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Listed Building – Conservation and Design

The building is a Grade II Listed Building. The listing includes the boundary wall and railings.

The most relevant UDP Policies are:

BE5 (Building Design and Siting) BE15 (Areas and Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic Interest) BE19 (Development Affecting Listed Buildings)

SDF Core Strategy Policy CS74 (Design Principles) is also relevant.

PPG15: ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’ sets out the Government’s expectations and guidance for protecting the historic environment. UDP Policies BE15 and BE19 and SDF Policy CS74 reflect the principles of PPG15.

There is a general presumption in favour of the preservation of listed buildings, except where a convincing case can be made for alteration or demolition. Local planning authorities are required to ‘have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses'.

The listing description notes the building as being in the Gothic Revival style with red brick, moulded brick dressings and gabled and hipped slated roofs. The round corner tower with wooden bell turret and lead latticework roof is noted, together with projecting gables and bays. The window openings are noted but there is no specific reference to the form of the window treatments. The interior is noted as being ‘largely original’ and as having a single space with arch braced roof. The dais, pulpit, choir stalls, organ case and panelled gallery are noted. Externally, the brick boundary wall with stone copings, spearhead railings, wrought iron gate and square gate piers are noted.

UDP Policy BE15 seeks to preserve or enhance buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest. Policy BE19 states that the demolition of Listed

188 Buildings will not be permitted and that proposals for change of use will be expected to preserve the character of the building. Where appropriate, alterations and extensions should preserve or repair original details and features of interest. Policy CS74 expects high quality new development which respects, takes advantage of and enhances distinctive features of the city and its neighbourhoods, including the distinctive heritage of buildings and settlement forms associated with the Victorian, Edwardian and Garden City suburbs.

Planning Policy Guidance Note ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’ (PPG15) states that applicants must be able to justify their proposals; they will need to show why works that affect the character of a listed building are desirable or necessary.

The external walls of the listed building and its boundary treatments are relatively intact but the roof structure and interior have been completely destroyed by the fire. Much of the character described in the statutory listing has therefore been lost. The footprint of the building is not proposed to be increased, although an existing light well running around the rear of the building is proposed to be increased to improve light into the rooms on the lower floor and allow external access. The elevation treatments to Vincent Road and South View Road, together with the corner tower and roof form, will be restored to their original appearance. The exception is the formation of a new opening in the boundary wall to Vincent Road to provide direct access to an existing entrance into the building. Subject to appropriate treatment, including new gate piers, the new opening can be accommodated without harm to the significance of the boundary wall/railings and without harming the setting of the building.

New upper floors will cut across the larger original windows which were designed to serve a single space. Whilst not ideal, some interference with the windows may be inevitable with any financially viable new use for the building. The previously approved development for 7 flats (01/01669/FUL) did protect the void behind the windows but that scheme was based on a conversion rather than a substantial rebuild. The treatment can be conditioned.

A central internal light well is proposed to be formed in order to provide light to some of the rooms. This is necessary in order to permit corridors to run between the rooms and some of the larger windows on the main elevations. The light well will not affect the external appearance of the building.

The rear elevation is proposed to be rebuilt with the upper floor being extended out over a former roof slope to a previously extended central section. The roof form is to be modified accordingly. The windows on this elevation are also proposed to be altered from the original arrangement. The rear elevation is not referred to in the listing description. These works do not affect the two primary elevations which are detailed in the listing description. It can be concluded that the works to this elevation can be carried out without harming the special interest of the building.

189 ensure that the works are carried out to an appropriate method and specification, the proposals can comply with Policies BE15, BE19 and CS74 and it is not necessary for the applicant to demonstrate alternative proposals for the building for the reasons specified in PPG15.

Listed Building – Future Preservation

If listed building consent and/or planning permission is refused and no alternative scheme for the site comes forward, it will be necessary to consider works to prevent further deterioration of the remaining fabric of the building.

Section 54 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 enables the local planning authority to carry out urgent works for the preservation of an unoccupied listed building. These works must be restricted to ‘urgent’ repairs, in this case to keep the facades wind and weatherproof and safe from collapse. The LPA can then serve notice on the owner to recover the costs. There is a right of appeal against such a notice, including on the grounds of hardship.

Section 47 permits the compulsory purchase of a listed building not in a state of reasonable preservation. This is subject to non-compliance with a Repairs Notice that must have been served previously. Repairs Notices are not confined to urgent works or to unoccupied buildings and can be used to secure the building’s preservation as at the date of listing.

The above powers are included for information only. Consideration of the application should not be influenced by them.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The application is for listed building consent for works that also form part of a concurrent application for planning permission (ref 09/01519/FUL). Consideration is restricted to the impact of the proposals on the special architectural and historic character of the building.

The building is severely fire-damaged and all the internal features of special interest have been destroyed. Overall, it is considered that the works required to implement the proposed use could be carried out without significantly harming the external appearance of what remains of the historic building. This relies on the sympathetic treatment of the new internal floors relative to the large upper windows.

It is recommended that listed building consent is granted subject to conditions to ensure that the works are carried out to an appropriate method and specification in compliance with Policies BE15, BE19 and CS74.

190

Case Number 09/01519/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Structural repairs and internal alterations to building to form apart-hotel (comprising of 40 units) (As amended 09/10/2009)

Location Haqqani House Vincent Road Sheffield S7 1BX

Date Received 18/05/2009

Team SOUTH

Applicant/Agent Tribal MJP

Recommendation Refuse

For the following reason(s):

1 The Local Planning Authority consider that there is insufficient off-street parking provision to serve the proposed development and the proposed development would result in an unacceptable level of vehicular activity and demand for on-street parking within the Housing Area. The proposals are thereby contrary to Policy H14(d) and (k) of the Unitary Development Plan. The Options Appraisal and Justification for the development do not sufficiently demonstrate that there are no alternative uses that would secure the repair and re-use of the Grade II listed building without causing harm within the Housing Area resulting from the level of associated vehicular activity and demand for on-street parking. In the absence of such justification the Local Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that the proposed development justifies departing from the provisions of UDP Policy H14(d) and (k).

191 Site Location

INTRODUCTION

This application is accompanied by an application for Listed Building Consent (ref 09/01520/LBC). The application relates to a badly fire-damaged Grade II Listed Building.

The building is understood to have been vacant for approximately 18 months prior to a serious fire in April 2008. It was last used as a Sufi Centre, had previously been a Christian Science Church and was originally a Methodist Church.

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The c.1890 building is located on a triangular site at the junction of Vincent Road with South View Road. The junction includes a third highway (South View Crescent) and the building is an imposing feature in views from Abbeydale Road. The highways rise away from the road junction.

192 The large scale building is constructed in red brick and has a footprint of approximately 400m2. The building covers the majority of the site although there is an enclosed former garden area. It has principal elevations, including significant gables, to both road frontages and a feature 3 storey round corner tower where the highways meet. Only the external walls and steel beams which used to support the timber floors remain. The elevations are supported by scaffolding and temporary fencing has been erected in the highway to ensure public safety and site security.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

Applications for planning permission and listed building consent for an apart-hotel with 51 rooms were withdrawn in April 2009 (refs 09/00483/FUL and 09/00484/LBC).

An application for use as a residential care home (Class C2) was withdrawn in 2000 (ref 98/00876/FUL).

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

The application has been publicised in the press and notices posted at the site. 60 individual addresses were notified by letter and the Ward Councillors were also informed. A second round of notification by letter was undertaken following the submission of amendments to the scheme. The amendments do not alter the number of rooms proposed and do not address the representations initially raised.

A total of 25 letters of objection have been received from local residents. The objections are summarised below:

193 Parking Issues/Travel Plan

- Hotel visitors and service vehicles will exacerbate existing on street parking problems – residents already have trouble finding spaces – don’t want to be forced into residents parking permits - developer’s ‘car free’ intentions cannot be enforced – could result in 40 extra cars which would interrupt traffic flow and cause congestion around the road junction – potential safety concerns for children - proposed access will cause disruption on adjoining streets - Abbeydale Road is subject to parking restrictions (‘clearway’) but no restrictions in surrounding streets – extra cars will be competing for parking spaces on residential streets - No residents parking scheme in area – already increased parking due to proximity of Sharrow permit scheme – problems will be exacerbated, especially when proposed scheme for Highfields area is implemented – particular problem on football match days - Concerns about Travel Plan assumptions regarding visitor’s travel behaviour, accuracy about travel distances quoted and lack of commitment to implementing options to reduce car travel – measures should be enforced if permission is granted - No provision for taxi drop-off/turning

Overdevelopment

- overdevelopment – too many units with no off street parking, out of scale with local amenities and rooms too small to be attractive to visitors - very high density relative to surrounding terraced housing

Occupancy

- concerns about transient residents who will give nothing to this area which has active residents groups and a very strong sense of community - Concerns that there will be pressure to subsequently convert to hostel accommodation or that hotel will be effectively used as a hostel, as has happened to some of hotels in area – need assurances – hostel use could lead to rise in crime and anti-social behaviour – suggest condition restricting occupancy to outside business and leisure travellers only - Use of nearby private houses for short term accommodation has caused problems in area – potential for significant concentration of similar tenants

Residential Amenity

- overlooking and overshadowing of existing properties – taller building - noise and disturbance due to 24 hour entrance – arrivals and departures at all hours in quiet residential area - developer should consider the community – suggest arts/craft studios at ground floor level and possibly café open to public

194 Impact on Listed Building/Design

- works likely to result in further damage to listed building – could result in complete demolition – doubts about structure withstanding the works - any new development will compromise aesthetics of area - should incorporate ‘green’ principles into structure of the building and include tree planting

Viability

- Already 7 hotels within 2 miles of the site, some of which are already struggling at about 60% occupancy and have to rely on sales of food and drink – no need for this development and business model likely to fail - Business details show rooms will be expensive compared to hotels in local area – doubts about viability - Developer has no local history and no portfolio to demonstrate expertise which will be required for this proposal – has also failed to consult with community

Consultation

- Concern that Muslim community is largely unaware of proposals - Concern that notification is generally inadequate

Other

- Application has no merit whatsoever - Will not fulfil any need in local or wider area - Private sector proposals need careful consideration – maximum returns will only benefit investors

Several of the letters acknowledge that the site requires some form of action and support some form of development. Suggestions include sheltered accommodation, up to 10 private ‘luxury’ flats, local health services facility. A community facility would be preferred but it is acknowledged that there are several in the area already.

Councillor Jillian Creasy objects to the proposals:

- unsuitable use within dense residential area – housing would be more appropriate - notes scheme has reduced from scheme previously withdrawn – improvement but still very high density given close proximity to terrace housing – unacceptable additional activity on residential street - no need for another hotel – others in area, notably on Chippinghouse Rd and Wostenholm Rd are struggling – likely to result in commercial pressure for a use it has not been designed for (hostel) - developer’s financial advisor notes that there are other viable uses - the advisor also notes dense terraced housing, ‘ethnic shops’ and few local attractions apart from the Mosque and SUFC, which has a large

195 hotel – leads Cllr Creasy to conclusion that reasonably priced flats may be very popular in area which attracts first time buyers and is home to growing extended families who would prefer to stay near to each other - disputes Travel Plan claim that 75% of visitors will not bring cars and that car-club spaces and cycle racks will provide adequate car parking – parking is a main problem in the area and will worsen with introduction of Highfield permit scheme – even if TP is correct, 10 spaces will be needed in area where residents already struggle to park - notes widespread objection to apart-hotel

Paul Blomfield (Parliamentary Candidate for Central) objects:

- overdevelopment of site and will overlook many of surrounding houses - already difficult for residents to find on-street parking spaces – proposal will inevitably attract more cars and taxis and contribute hugely to existing parking difficulties in area - negative impact on sustainability of area – will increase turnover of people living in area and do nothing to make local community more sustainable - question need for hotel in this location where there are several in surrounding area and a significant number of new hotels in City Centre - lack of community consultation - proposals should benefit local community e.g. affordable housing or sheltered accommodation

The Central Branch Labour Party object:

- overdevelopment – many of the single studios are very small – 40 is too many - surrounding roads already parked to capacity and proposed residents parking scheme will worsen situation - overlooking – obscure glazed windows can still open - no community consultation - already considerable short-stay accommodation in the area – will not add to sustainability of community – contrary to PPS1 - disagree with applicant’s view that this is only viable way of re-use of listed building and should outweigh any other considerations

The Conservation Advisory Group (CAG) commented on the original applications for 51 rooms (09/00483/FUL and 09/00484/LBC). The current applications only modify the internal layout and do not affect the structure or appearance of the building in a different way to the earlier applications. CAG’s comments were minuted as follows:

196 The Group welcomed the principle of development, particularly in the light of the present condition of the building. The Group requested the retention of the remaining historic fabric and features of the building and stated that there was a lack of detail in respect of the proposals regarding the fenestration. The Group also indicated that it would wish to have an oversight of how the new building was to be developed.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Land Use Policy

The site lies within a Housing Area as defined in the Unitary Development Plan (UDP). There are no proposals to change this designation in the Sheffield Development Framework (SDF) Preferred Options Proposals Map.

UDP Policy H10 (Development in Housing Areas) lists hotels as an ‘acceptable’ use in Housing Areas. The former use of the building as a community facility (Class D1) is also listed as ‘acceptable’.

National policy in PPS6: ‘Planning for Town Centres’ supersedes the UDP policies with regard to ‘town centre uses’. The proposed apart-hotel is classified as a ‘town centre use’ for the purposes of PPS6. PPS6 requires an assessment of need for the development, impact of the development and a sequential approach to site selection to be carried out for town centre uses proposed outside town centres.

The PPS6 assessments have not been requested in this instance as the scale and nature of the proposal is not expected to have any material impact on the vitality and viability of the City Centre or the nearest District Centres.

In view of the above, the principle of an apart-hotel in this location is considered acceptable in land use policy terms.

UDP Policy CF2 (Keeping Community Facilities) permits a change of use involving the loss of community facilities provided that equivalent accommodation would be readily available elsewhere. Other tests within CF2 are that the loss is unavoidable and equivalent facilities would be provided in the same area or that that facilities are no longer required.

The building had been vacant for at least 18 months prior to the fire and there are a number of facilities for worship within walking distance of the site. None of the representations received indicate that there is a ‘need’ to restore the building to Class D1 use. The proposals are not considered to conflict with Policy CF2.

Listed Building – Conservation and Design

The building is a Grade II Listed Building. The listing includes the boundary wall and railings.

The most relevant UDP Policies are:

197 BE5 (Building Design and Siting) BE15 (Areas and Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic Interest) BE19 (Development Affecting Listed Buildings)

SDF Core Strategy Policy CS74 (Design Principles) is also relevant.

UDP Policy BE15 seeks to preserve or enhance buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest. Policy BE19 states that the demolition of Listed Buildings will not be permitted and that proposals for change of use will be expected to preserve the character of the building. Where appropriate, alterations and extensions should preserve or repair original details and features of interest. Policy BE5 expects good design and materials in all new and refurbished buildings. Policy CS74 expects high quality new development which respects, takes advantage of and enhances distinctive features of the city and its neighbourhoods, including the distinctive heritage of buildings and settlement forms associated with the Victorian, Edwardian and Garden City suburbs.

The external walls of the listed building and its boundary treatments are relatively intact but the roof structure and interior have been completely destroyed by the fire. Much of the character described in the statutory listing has therefore been lost. The building was originally a very imposing focal point of community worship at a strategic point entering the small Victorian terraces in this part of Sharrow. The importance of the building as a focal point for the area should not be under estimated and every effort is required to prevent its loss. Subject to the ultimate survival and sensitive restoration of the external walls and openings, any proposed new use for the building should therefore be welcomed in principle.

The footprint of the building is not proposed to be increased, although an existing light well running around the rear of the building is proposed to be increased to improve light into the rooms on the lower floor and allow external access. The

198 elevation treatments to Vincent Road and South View Road, together with the corner tower and roof form, will be restored to their original appearance. The exception is the formation of a new opening in the boundary wall to Vincent Road to provide direct access to an existing entrance into the building. Subject to appropriate treatment, including new gate piers, the new opening can be accommodated without harm to the significance of the boundary wall/railings and without harming the setting of the building.

Overall, it is considered that the alterations required to implement the proposed use could be carried out without significantly harming the external appearance of what remains of the historic building. This relies on the sympathetic treatment of the new internal floors relative to the large upper windows. Subject to conditions to ensure that the works are carried out to an appropriate method and specification, the proposals can comply with Policies BE15, BE19 and CS74 and the ‘physical design’ elements of BE5.

Listed Building – Future Preservation

If planning permission is refused and no alternative scheme for the site comes forward, it will be necessary to consider works to prevent further deterioration of the remaining fabric of the building.

199 Section 47 permits the compulsory purchase of a listed building not in a state of reasonable preservation. This is subject to non-compliance with a Repairs Notice that must have been served previously. Repairs Notices are not confined to urgent works or to unoccupied buildings and can be used to secure the building’s preservation as at the date of listing.

The above powers are included for information only. Consideration of the application should not be influenced by them. The decision must be based upon adopted planning policies.

Sustainable Design

The submitted Design Statement refers to a number of measures aimed at reducing carbon emissions by 20%. However, the Statement is non-committal as the measures are subject to a future viability assessment. Due to the constraints of the listed building, a flexible approach is appropriate.

Intensity of Proposed Use

The proposal is to provide a total of 40 units which vary in size between 14.5m2 and 45.5m2. This far exceeds the intensity of use proposed in any previous scheme for the site and will result in an intensity of accommodation that far exceeds the grain of development in the immediate area.

It is acknowledged that the fire will have seriously escalated the costs of conversion. Nevertheless, the impact of a town centre use of this scale on this residential area is significant and should be justified. The proposed use will introduce a commercial venture without making any contribution to the local community within this residential neighbourhood. The benefit to the historic environment in restoring the listed building and securing a new use needs to be balanced against the harm from the intensity of the use within the residential area. The harm arises primarily from the levels of comings and goings and the vehicular activity associated with the use.

It is acknowledged that the 40 units proposed is a reduction on the original proposal (51 units). The developer was asked to reduce the scheme to the minimum required to make the scheme viable and to provide evidence to justify the number of units. An options appraisal to consider alternative uses for the site was also requested, the objective being to establish that the apart-hotel is the only viable use.

The applicants have provided some information. This includes a supporting letter from their finance advisor which states that 40 rooms is the minimum threshold of viability as the high development costs will require a high development return. It also expresses ‘strong reservations’ regarding the viability of an alternative use and considers that such other uses might include a children’s day nursery, care home or private flats. All other ‘social uses’ fall well below the viability threshold and are ‘almost impossible to finance in the current economic circumstance.’

200 A Preliminary Budget Estimate for the scheme has been submitted together with the first year average turnover and operating expenditure forecast. Unfortunately, the information submitted does not show how the turnover relates to the development costs and does not demonstrate that 40 units are required as a minimum to meet the development costs. There is no detailed assessment of the costs and returns associated with the other uses referred to, all of which would bring some form of benefit to the local community.

The harm caused by the development to the residential area is not sufficiently outweighed by the heritage benefits in the absence of full justification for the level of development proposed. On balance, and having regard to the issues in the following sub sections, the development is deemed contrary to UDP Policy H14 (Conditions on Development in Housing Areas).

Amenity

UDP Policies H14 (Conditions on Development in Housing Areas) and BE7 (Design of Buildings Used by the Public) are most relevant.

Some of the rooms have very poor standards of amenity, particularly in terms of natural light and/or privacy and/or outlook. It is reasonable to be flexible on these matters having regard to the benefits of securing the future of the listed building. The developer has submitted a unilateral obligation which will prevent units being rented for a period longer than 3 months. This is in recognition of the standard of accommodation being provided. The number of units proposed is accommodated with only a minor addition at upper floor level to the building.

In the absence of the developer demonstrating any ‘need’ for the apart-hotel and having regard to the financial appraisal submitted, the viability of the scheme as a successful business is by no means certain. This could lead to pressure for subsequent conversion to some other form of accommodation e.g. hostel, private flats. Any such proposals would need to be the subject of separate applications for planning permission and must not affect the consideration of this proposal.

Assuming that all of the rooms could accommodate a double bed, there is potential for some 80+ visitors being on site at one time. The level of activity within the building is not considered to be a problem as the units are self-contained and there are no opportunities for large gatherings. The structure of the building is such that noise leakage is unlikely to be a problem and the main entrance is separated from the adjoining properties.

The proposals have been amended to provide for more inclusive access. 4 units (10%) are intended to be suitable for use by disabled persons. Lift access is included in the building. Some compromises are necessary due to the constraints of the site but, generally, the proposals are sufficient in terms of UDP Policy BE7.

The problem arises from the potential for a high number of visitors being collected and dropped off at all hours of the day and night. The level of activity is likely to be far greater than would normally be associated with the properties in this area and will be concentrated directly opposite residential property. Traffic calming

201 measures are in place in South View Road and Vincent Road. These measures have discouraged these highways being used as through routes between Abbeydale Road and Sharrow Lane which has resulted in a much quieter environment for residents. Any concentration of taxi activity directly outside the building will significantly reduce the level of amenity currently enjoyed by the nearest dwellings and, on balance, is considered contrary to UDP Policy H14(k).

The adjoining terraced properties in the two highways have blank side elevations facing the rear of the site. The windows to the studio rooms facing these elevations are proposed to be clear glazed. The windows in the central section have been amended so as to be obscure glazed and non-opening to a height 1.7m above finished floor levels. These treatments are acceptable in terms of maintaining adequate privacy to the rear of the existing dwellings. In this respect the proposals comply with Policy H14(c).

Car Parking and Travel Patterns

The most relevant UDP/SDF Policies are:

BE9 (Design for Vehicles) H14 (Conditions on Development in Housing Areas) CS53 (Management of Demand for Travel)

There is currently no off street parking to serve the building. The previous uses of the building are not known to have caused parking problems. This can reasonably by expected to be due to relatively low numbers of people attending the place of worship and/or the majority of users being within easy walking distance of the site.

Due to the proposed use being intended for people who do not live locally, and the high number of units involved, the proposals can reasonably be expected to result in a significant increase in traffic to the site. This is likely to be a combination of taxis and visitors with their own transport. There is evidence of high levels of demand for on-street parking in the area already. This is due to the relatively narrow frontages of dwellings coupled with the absence of off-street parking to serve those dwellings.

In contrast to the dwellings, the building has two street frontages of approximately 45m and 35m, respectively. Nevertheless, Policy H14(d) requires ‘appropriate off- street parking’. Bearing in mind that it is bad practice to park within 10m of a road junction, the available space for parking outside the site is significantly reduced. The site frontage already shows demand for parking and the lack of off-street parking is contrary to H14(d).

Policy CS53 includes measures to manage the demand for travel in all areas of the City. These measures include applying maximum parking standards, implementing Travel Plans, promoting sustainable use of vehicles (e.g. car clubs) and creating Controlled Parking Zones.

At present, the Car Parking Guidelines indicate a maximum provision of 1 space per bedroom plus 1 space per 3 non-residential staff. This equates to a maximum

202 of 41 spaces. BE9 requires adequate parking provision for people with disabilities. This should be suitably located for access into the building.

The proposals include a single disabled parking bay within the site, although the length of the parking space is insufficient to accommodate the required access zone. The parking space is located off Vincent Road adjoining the boundary with the dwelling at No196. The plans also refer to provision for an electric/hybrid pool car in this area. Whilst it may be possible to accommodate two standard size parking bays, the disabled bay markings prevent provision for a pool car.

The proposed bay is substandard in length and users would then need to negotiate the steep gradient of Vincent Road to reach the entrance to the building at a point some 20m away.

The proposals also include external cycle parking provision for 16 cycles and space for 2 pool scooters. The Car Parking Guidelines consider cycle provision for staff but only for guests if the development is close to a long-distance cycle route. The site does not meet this criterion. Owing to the nature of the use, it is not expected that demand for car use will be addressed by the provision of cycle stands.

PPG15 advises that planning controls should be exercised sympathetically where new uses are key to a listed building’s preservation. In this instance, the disabled parking provision is considered acceptable due to the inability to make more appropriate provision.

The applicant has submitted a Travel Plan. The Plan states that guests will be informed that there is no parking on site and goes on to state that it is ‘reasonable to expect that 75% of hotel guests will not travel by private car’. They also anticipate that travel patterns would be similar to a ‘residential block’ in that guests are likely to be staying close to their day-time destination. This is not comparable as the apart-hotel visitors are expected to be travelling from some distance to the site.

The Travel Plan has been amended and now confirms provision of pool cycles, 2 pool cars (subject to disabled parking being moved on-street), possible provision of a pool scooter, possible provision of South Yorkshire Travel Cards/tickets, provision of details of local taxi services and promotion of public car parks/park- and-ride. Mitigation measures include a commitment to assessing the impact in practice and, if necessary, contributing to the implementation of a residents parking scheme.

Consideration has been given to marking out a disabled bay on-street, but this could not be designated in connection with the proposed use and is therefore not appropriate. This will prevent off-street parking of the pool cars.

Even if it can be subsequently demonstrated that the parking associated with the apart-hotel justifies a permit scheme, it is unreasonable impose such a scheme in order to accommodate a private development.

203 Using similar methodology to that within the Travel Plan, it is estimated that there is potential parking demand for between 16 and 23 vehicles. Whilst it would be reasonable to be more flexible in applying parking standards having regard to the objective of securing the future of the listed building, the anticipated demand is unacceptably high considering that off-street parking provision is restricted to one disabled bay to serve the development. A reduced scheme would still result in on- street parking demand and increased levels of vehicular activity but would be more acceptable.

In view of the above, the proposals are considered contrary to UDP Policy H14(d).

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The application relates to a severely fire-damaged Grade II Listed Building. Only the external walls and boundary wall/railings remain relatively intact. The building was originally a church and most recently a Sufi Centre. There is no evidence that change of use would leave a need for community facilities in the area unsatisfied and any proposals are therefore acceptable in terms of UDP Policy CF2. Planning permission had previously been granted for use as student accommodation and for conversion to 7 self-contained flats. These permissions have expired.

The proposal for a 40 room apart-hotel will secure the future of the listed building. The proposed ‘town centre use’ is not expected to have any adverse impact on the vitality and viability of the City Centre or nearest District Centres. With appropriate conditions, it is considered that the works can be carried out sympathetically without demonstrable harm to the external appearance of the building. The proposals are therefore capable of complying with UDP Policies BE15 and BE19 and SDF Core Strategy Policy CS74.

Only one parking space will be available to serve the development and this would be allocated for disabled use. The proposals are anticipated to generate demand for between 16 and 23 parking spaces. A Travel Plan has been submitted and identifies a number of measures to reduce the need for private cars but, in the absence of on-street parking restrictions, it is not considered that demand will be effectively reduced.

It is acknowledged that car parking provision will be below minimum requirements in any proposal for re-use of the building. This should not preclude a new use for the building but it will be necessary to justify the amount and type of development proposed. Adequate consideration of possible alternative uses for the building and a justification for the scale of the use proposed have repeatedly been requested but insufficient information has been provided.

In the absence of such detailed assessment of options, it is considered inappropriate to permit a level of use that will have a significant impact on parking in the residential area. The level of vehicular activity associated with arrival and departures is also likely to reduce the level of residential amenity with potential for disturbance late at night.

204 On balance, the proposals are considered contrary to UDP Policy H14(d) and (k) and it is recommended that planning permission is refused.

205

Case Number 09/00055/FUL

Application Type A Full Planning Application

Proposal Use of land as car park

Location University Of Sheffield 156 Broomspring Lane Sheffield S10 2FD

Date Received 07/01/2009

Team SOUTH

Applicant/Agent Hague Plant Ltd

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act.

2 The use shall cease on or before 24 November 2009.

The permanent use of the land as a car park would prejudice the satisfactory development of the land.

3 Before the development is commenced details of the proposed surface materials and finishes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

4 The gates at the Broomspring Lane access to the site shall be kept permanently locked, and at no time shall access to the car park be taken from Broomspring Lane.

In the interests of traffic safety and the amenities of the locality.

5 The development must be carried out in complete accordance with the following approved documents:

Site Location Plan (as amended and received on 11 November 2009),

206 Drawing Entitled- Proposed Land use for car parking following demolition Drawing Entitled- Proposed Land use for car parking following demolition - Proposed Surfacing

Unless otherwise authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to define the permission.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

BE16 - Development in Conservation Areas H11 - Development in Housing Areas in Nether Edge and Broomhall H14 - Conditions on Development in Housing Areas

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

Attention is drawn to the following directives:

207 Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

The application site is located to the north of Broomspring Lane, and is incorporated within the Hanover Conservation Area, and also within the Nether Edge/Broomhill Housing Area. It currently incorporates an unused building that is subject to significant vandalism and general deterioration. Also included is some University of Sheffield car parking provision, which is accessed from Wilkinson Street.

Conservation Area Consent has been previously granted for the demolition of the building within the site. The site also currently includes 14 car parking spaces which are accessed from Wilkinson Street. This car park is authorised, given its association with the building at the site. Therefore, demolition of the building will bring an end to the authorised use as a general car park.

The current application seeks planning permission to allow the existing parking spaces and the area made available after demolition of the building to be used as a

208 car park for a temporary period of twelve months. Access to the car park will continue to be from Wilkinson Street, across neighbouring University land. The building to the west of the Wilkinson Street access is a University administration building, and the building to the east serves as offices for a number of independent businesses.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

09/00054/CAC, Demolition of building. Conservation Area Consent, granted 20.04.2009

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

Following neighbouring notification, placement of site notices and the publication of a press advertisement, one written representation has been received from an occupier of a neighbouring dwelling. The comments can be summarised as follows: - In support of demolition of the building. - Experiencing damp and condensation as earth level is 1.5m higher than neighbouring ground level. University authorities have been notified but have failed to take any action. - Concern regarding security implications relating to access to neighbouring gardens from application site.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

The application site is located within Hanover Conservation Area, and as such the proposal is required to satisfy the provisions of Policy BE16 – Development in Conservations Areas. This policy requires proposals to preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area.

The site is located in Nether Edge/Broomhill Housing Area. Adopted Unitary Development Plan Policy H11 does not refer to Car Park uses, and therefore the current proposal is required to be assessed upon its individual merits.

Policy H14 states, amongst other things, that proposals for change of use should not deprive residents of security, lead to a concentration of non-housing uses, cause pollution, noise, smell or excessive traffic or be on a scale consistent with the residential character of the Housing Area.

The existing car park includes 14 car parking spaces, which are accessed from Wilkinson Street. The gates at Broomspring Lane are permanently locked. The building to the west of the Wilkinson Street access is a University office/teaching building, and the building to the east is occupied by a number of independent offices.

209 Conservation Area Issues

The proposal involves the provision of a further eight parking spaces. It is not considered that the extra spaces would undermine the character of the Conservation Area. The additional parking areas would be finished with an open graded macadam surface treatment. Precise details of the final appearance of this treatment are not clear, and therefore a condition requiring submission and agreement of details should be added to any consent granted to deal with this matter.

The University do not have a long term strategy for the future use of the site at the current time. However, the proposal seeks consent for a temporary period of twelve months. This is considered to be reasonable as it would avoid the proposed situation remaining the case at the site permanently.

Neighbour Amenity Issues

The site is already used for a non-residential purpose, and the proposal would develop this use rather than introducing a new type of use into the area. The eight additional parking spaces at the site would increase this existing use. However, this would not be to a degree where the operation at the site became inconsistent with the residential character of the area.

Turning to the potential impacts on immediately adjoining neighbours. The buildings next to the point of entrance on Wilkinson Street are non residential, and therefore are not sensitive in the same way as a residential dwelling to impacts arising from the additional vehicular movements.

The proposed parking bays are located approximately 1metre from the western boundary of the site shared with a number of bungalows. In turn these bungalows are located approximately 6 metres from this boundary. The level of the proposed bays is set below this neighbouring land by approximately 1 metre.

The existing parking layout currently includes bays in similar proximity to the neighbouring bungalows. As such the proposed bays would not represent the introduction of vehicular activity to a previously quiet area. It should also be noted that the spaces would fall under the control of the University. It would therefore be expected that the parking area would continue to be predominantly used during office / business hours, with use at more sensitive times being much less frequent.

The proposed spaces are set away from the Broomspring Lane dwelling to the east of the site. The modest increase in vehicle movements along the access drive would not be considered to have a harmful impact upon amenities of this neighbouring dwelling, particularly since the parking area would be mainly used during business hours.

Concern has been expressed relating to impacts of damp and condensation on this neighbouring dwelling. It should be noted that the new surfacing which is proposed for the additional parking bays, and a portion of the existing parking area will be

210 surfaced with permeable materials. This will help to reduce surface water run-off toward this neighbouring dwelling, which may help to address some of the problems mentioned. However, in general terms it should be noted that as the matters seem to be occurring currently and the proposals do not suggest a worsening of the situation, it would not constitute a material planning consideration relevant to the assessment of this application.

In relation to concerns relating to security and trespassing into neighbouring gardens from the application site, the current proposal incorporates no aspects which would increase the potential for this. It would therefore be inappropriate to seek to address this issue as part of this application.

Highway Issues

The gates to the site at the Broomspring Lane are currently kept permanently locked. In order to prevent short cutting through the car park it is recommended that a condition is added to any consent granted which requires this gate to be kept permanently locked so to avoid this potential.

The University experience significant shortfall in their levels of car parking provision, and therefore the extra spaces are considered to appropriate.

Overall, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in highway safety terms.

RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS

The comments raised within the neighbour’s representation have been covered within the above assessment.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

The application seeks consent to increase the number of parking spaces provided within an existing car park, after the demolition of an existing building, and to use the site as a whole as a car park, for 12 months.

The proposal is considered to preserve the character of the Hanover Conservation Area. It is located within the Nether Edge / Broomhall Housing Area. The proposal would be considered to avoid any harm upon the area’s residential character. It would have an acceptable impact upon the amenities of the neighbouring occupiers, since only eight extra parking spaces are proposed and the movements would be predominantly concentrated within office/ business hours.

Consequently, it is recommended that temporary planning permission is granted for a twelve month period for the provision of further parking spaces following the demolition of the building, and use of the land as a car park.

211

Case Number 08/05959/LBC

Application Type Listed Building Consent Application

Proposal Removal and replacement of various internal doors to a fire resisting standard, removal and replacement of existing timber partition walls with a fire resistant partition and fire separation between the lift shaft and loading bay

Location Sheffield Central Library Surrey Street Sheffield S1 1XZ

Date Received 08/12/2008

Team CITY CENTRE AND EAST

Applicant/Agent Sheffield City Council

Recommendation Grant Conditionally

Subject to:

1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

In order to comply with the requirements of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Regulations 1990.

2 The development must be carried out in complete accordance with the following approved documents: Plan reference numbers AA(3)01 Rev A, AA(3)02 Rev B, AA(3)03 Rev A, AA(3)04 Rev B, AA(3)05, AL(0)01, AL(0)02, AL(0)03, AL(0)04 Rev A, AL(0)05 Rev A, AL(0)06, AL(0)07, AL(0)08, AL(0)09, AL(0)010, AL(0)011, AL(0)12, AL(0)13 dated 05 October 2009 and the revised Town Planning Supporting Statement Listed Building Statement (September 2009), received on 05 October 2009 unless otherwise authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In order to define the permission.

3 Before the development is commenced samples of all proposed external materials and finishes for all replacement doors shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

In order to ensure an appropriate quality of development.

212 4 Notwithstanding the proposed re-use of ironmongery, prior to the installation of any new ironmongery onto any of the repaired or replaced doors, further details of such new ironmongery shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to its installation and shall thereafter be retained.

To protect the character of the Listed Building in accordance with Policies BE15 and BE19 of the Unitary Development Plan.

5 Prior to the commencement of development, further details of the proposed shutter and finish to the blockwork to the rear elevation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained.

To protect the character of the Listed Building in accordance with Policies BE15 and BE19 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Attention is drawn to the following justifications:

BE15 - Areas and Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest BE19 - Development affecting Listed Buildings PPG15 - Planning and the Historic Environment

and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance.

213 Site Location

LOCATION AND PROPOSAL

This application relates to the Grade II Listed Central Library on Surrey Street. The building was designed by W.G. Davies, the Sheffield City Architect and was completed as a central library and municipal art gallery in 1934. It is designed in a classical style with the front elevation to Surrey Street articulated by 6 Ionic pilasters. Structurally, it is supported by a steel frame and is faced externally in Portland Stone with generous vertically proportioned window to the Surrey Street and Tudor Square elevations. Internally, the building is little altered and retains most of the original features including bookcases, light fittings and plasterwork reliefs.

This is an application for Listed Building Consent for works to the Grade II Listed Building to improve fire safety for visiting members of the public and staff.

The application comprises the following works:

214 Replacement of 40 internal doors with new doors that are finished to a fire resisting standard with fire certificate certification. The traditional ‘front of house’ doors will be replaced in exactly the same style as the original doors and will be fabricated from European Oak. Existing painted flush doors in the ‘back of house’ areas will be replaced with a matching contemporary flush type timber door to a fire resting standard with fire certification whilst other more modern style doors will also be replaced like-for-like . All ironmongery, including locks and furniture, will be refitted onto the new doors where possible;

Removal of an existing timber partition wall between the art gallery shop and the main staircase to be replaced with a half-hour fire resistant partition. This will be treated with the same plaster finish as the existing wall;

Fire separation between the lift shaft and the loading bay at the Arundel Gate service entrance by constructing block partition with a one hour fire resisting shutter;

Asbestos removal to concealed pipe work within the redundant picture lift. These works will have no visual impact on the fabric of the building.

There are no external alterations proposed to the building.

It is relevant to note that the original submission proposed the removal and replacement of all doors within the Library. Following further negotiation with the applicant, this has subsequently been amended to retain and repair the five sets of decorative doors to the main ground and first floor library rooms, which are constructed in oak with decorative wrought iron work within the glass. These main doors are a focal point within the main staircase and their retention and repair is welcomed. Such repairs do not require Listed Building Consent and are therefore not included as part of this application.

Additionally, the applicant is seeking to install secondary glazed fire resisting units to windows within the stair enclosure, which ensures that the original windows are retained as well as the replacement of glass to the display cabinets on the first floor landing of the main staircase with fire-resistant safety glass. These works are considered to be ‘de minimis’ such that Listed Building Consent is not required and are not assessed as part of this application.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

There is an extensive planning history to the Central Library, principally relating to the installation of advertisements and none are considered directly relevant to the determination of this application.

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS

The application has been advertised by means of a press notice and a site notice as a development affecting a Grade II Listed Building and by neighbour notification. No representations have been received.

215 English Heritage have advised that they do not wish to offer any comment on this application and recommend that it is determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

This application seeks Listed Building Consent for works to the Grade II Listed Central Library to enable the implementation of the results of a Fire Risk Assessment Report. The works are relatively minor and the key issue for assessment is the impact of the works upon the character and appearance of this Grade II Listed Building.

In terms of planning policy, Paragraph 3.12 of PPG15, which relates to alterations and extensions of Listed Buildings, acknowledges that many listed buildings are already in well-established uses, and any changes need to be considered only in this context. Paragraph 3.13 advises that many listed buildings can sustain some degree of sensitive alteration or extension to accommodate continuing or new uses. More specifically, paragraph 3.26 of PPG15 relates to building and fire legislation and advises that in exercising their responsibilities for the safety of buildings under the building and fire legislation, local planning authorities should deal sympathetically with proposals for the repair or conversion of historic buildings.

Within the Unitary Development Plan, Policy BE15 advises that buildings and areas of special architectural of historic interest will be preserved or enhanced and development that would harm their character of appearance will not be permitted. Policy BE19 requires that internal and external alterations to a Listed Building should preserve its character, appearance and setting. These policies reflect guidance contained in Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment and S66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, which states that in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a Listed Building or its setting, the local planning authority must have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.

The works proposed as part of this application are required specifically to ensure that the Library meets the requirements set out in the Fire Risk Assessment Report as well as compliance with The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, for which it is necessary to upgrade the staircase enclosure to a 30 minute fire resisting standard to provide a safe exit route.

The principal alteration is the replacement of various existing doors with new fire resistant doors as follows:

Lower Basement (back of house): Repair of one door (not subject to Listed Building Consent) and installation of six new doors; these are a combination of traditional and non-traditional doors and will be replaced like-for-like.

216 Upper Basement (back of house): Installation of seven new doors; these are a mix of traditional and non-traditional doors and will be replaced like-for-like.

Ground Floor: Repair of the three sets of main doors, which do not require Listed Building Consent. A new door will be fitted to the server room within the main entrance as well as four further new doors across the ground floor; these are predominantly traditional doors and will be replaced ‘like for like’ in traditional Oak.

First Floor: Repair of the two sets of main doors on the first floor, which do not require Listed Building Consent and installation of six new doors. These doors will also be matched like-for-like.

Intermediate Floor: Removal and repair of six new doors across the first floor with doors to match. Two sets of doors will be altered to provide one larger door leaf (800mm clear opening) and one smaller leaf to accommodate DDA compliance.

Second Floor (Graves Gallery): The installation of ten new doors. These comprise a combination of traditional and non-traditional doors that will be replaced like-for- like. In addition, two sets of doors will be altered to provide one larger door leaf (800mm clear opening) and one smaller leaf to accommodate DDA compliance.

The applicant has confirmed within the application drawings and supporting Listed Building Consent statement that the replacement doors will exactly match the form and style of existing doors.

The applicant has considered three options to achieve the 30-minute standard:

(i) Replace all existing doors with new fire resisting doors; (ii) Construct inner fire resisting lobby/corridors with fire doors whilst retaining the existing doors; (iii) Refurbish/upgrade existing doors.

Each option has been considered in terms of its impact on the character and appearance of the Listed Building, which is assessed as follows:

(i) Although there are operational benefits to replacing all the existing doors in terms of enabling more doors to be power operated for DDA compliance and reducing the need for continuing repairs, the replacement of all existing doors is considered to be detrimental to the fabric of the Listed Building. This is by virtue of the fact that it would require the replacement of the main library doors on the ground and first floor, which are the most decorative doors within the Library and contribute the most character to the building and to the public’s experience of the building as a Library. On this basis, option (i) has been discounted.

(ii) The construction of lobbies within the main library spaces is an alternative method to achieving a 30 minute fire resistant standard. However, the applicant has advised that the introduction of lobbies within the library and gallery rooms would detrimentally impact upon the form and scale of these rooms. Additionally, the applicant determines that the lobbies would be a hindrance to easy movement and access through the building to the detriment of the Library’s character. It is

217 considered that the applicant’s concern regarding the physical intrusion of lobbies within the Library and Gallery rooms is justified. The ceilings within these library spaces tend to be very high and include ornate fluted cornices such that the impact of introducing a lobby structure could be detrimental to the appearance of the Listed Building and would impact upon the original form of the Library. Accordingly, option (ii) has also been discounted.

(iii) The final option comprises the refurbishment and upgrade of all original doors, which has the benefit of ensuring the retention of all the original doors with very little outward modern intervention. The greatest disadvantage of this approach is that it would not be possible to secure verification by way of fire certification that a 30 minutes fire resistance route can be secured and the installation of power operated openers would also be difficult to achieve.

Having considered the options above, the application determines that a combination of options (i) and (iii) above is the most appropriate solution, which comprises the retention and refurbishment of the decorative ground and first floor doors to the main library rooms and the replacement of 40 other doors within the Library.

With regard to planning policy, it is considered that the fire precaution strategy does necessitate works within the Listed Building and in accordance with paragraph 3.26 of PPG15, the applicant is clearly exercising their responsibility for the safety of buildings under the fire legislation such that the local planning authority should deal sympathetically with proposals for the building’s repair. It is also considered that the applicant has provided a reasoned justification for discounting the comprehensive replacement of all doors and the provision of a lobby such that the proposed solution is acceptable in principle.

With regard to the proposed replacement doors, the applicant has confirmed, and it is demonstrated within the application, that the doors to be replaced will match the existing doors in style and appearance. The existing traditional hardwood doors will be replaced with traditionally crafted doors in European Oak except where the existing doors are more modern in appearance where a fire resistant timber door or equivalent style door with the same appearance will be selected. Where practicable, all existing ironmongery, including brass handles and kick plates, will be refitted. It is considered that such an approach will secure the viable and long- term use of the building as a Library and Gallery and will preserve its character and appearance. Thus, subject to the imposition of conditions to secure a sample of the hardwood to be used for the replacement doors prior to the commencement of the works, it is considered that the proposed application will preserve the character and appearance of the Listed Building as well as its setting.

The partition wall between the art gallery shop and the main staircase that is to be replaced with a half-hour fire resisting partition will be finished in the same plaster finish as the existing wall, such that it will not be noticeably different to the existing wall. On this basis, it is considered that this alteration will also not affect the character or appearance of the Listed Building.

218 Finally, in order to retain the vertically boarded sliding doors and the original lift mechanism to the redundant picture lift, which forms part of the character of the building, it is proposed to provide fire separation between the lift shaft and the loading bay at the Arundel Gate service entrance. This is to be achieved by constructing a blockwork partition with a one hour fire resisting shutter to the loading bay. This is situated to the rear of the main building, opposite the rear of the Lyceum Theatre such that the works will not be visible from Surrey Street or Tudor Square or any other public space. The block work will be fair faced to accept a paint finish and a fire rated lintel shutter will be installed. A service bay is a practical requirement for the premises and will secure the long term viable use of the building as a Library; it is not visible from any public route and the works are at the rear of the building and will not be detrimental to the special character of the Library, which principally stems from the elevation details to Tudor Square and Surrey Street and the original interiors. It is therefore considered that this element of the work will not be detrimental to the Library’s special character.

Overall, it is considered that the applicant has submitted sufficient justification to demonstrate that the proposed works are necessary in order to exercise their responsibility for the safety of the building. It is also considered that the proposed method of works is the only viable solution to balance the need to secure fire certification with the protection of the principal elements that form the special character of the Listed Building, which includes the doors to the main library rooms on the ground and first floor. It is therefore concluded that the works will preserve the special character of the building in accordance with Policies BE15 and BE19 of the UDP and advice within PPG15.

Access

Policy BE7 of the UDP relates to the design of buildings used by the public and advises that in all such buildings, provision will be expected to allow people with disabilities safe and easy access to the building and to appropriate parking spaces.

It is relevant to note that this application arises from the need to address the recommendations of a fire risk assessment report rather than to address accessibility issues within the Library such that it is not possible at the present time to improve external accessibility to the Library, which will remain as existing. Internally, it is proposed that where double doors are to be replaced and where practicable, which equates to six sets – two in the lower basement, two on the intermediate floor and two sets on the second floor within the Graves Gallery, these will be replaced with double doors that are altered to achieve an 800mm clear opening width. The power operation of doors will be considered in the future, as and when funding is available.

On balance, it is concluded that the works proposed as part of this application will not worsen the present non-compliance of the building with current DDA requirements, which is not unexpected given the age of the building. On this basis, the present proposal is considered acceptable although the applicant does accept that further improvements to access within the building will be appropriate in the future subject to funding and subject to a future Listed Building Consent

219 application. It is therefore considered to comply with Policy BE7 as far as practicable at this stage.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

This application proposes minor alterations to the Grade II Listed Central Library comprising the replacement of 40 new doors across the six floors of the Library and Graves Gallery, the removal of an existing timber partition wall between the art gallery shop and the main staircase, to be replaced with a half-hour fire resistant partition, and the construction of a block partition with a one hour fire resisting shutter to the rear service yard area.

The hardwood doors in public areas will be replaced by new traditionally crafted Oak doors that exactly match in form and style and can also achieve the 30 minute fire certification. Doors within the service areas that are not crafted hardwood will be replaced with doors to a similar design, also with a 30 minute door certification. Ironmongery will be re-used where at all possible but will otherwise be detailed to match. Additionally, the replacement partition wall will be finished to exactly match the existing wall. The works to the rear service area will not be visible from any public area and do not impact upon the special character of the building, which principally relates to the Surrey Street and Tudor Square facades and the interior detailing.

It is also relevant to note that the applicant proposes to repair the five sets of decorative doors to the main ground and first floor library rooms, which are constructed in oak with decorative wrought iron work within the glass. Such works do not require Listed Building Consent but serve to ensure that the character of the Library is further protected.

Overall, the proposals are considered necessary and sympathetic to the Listed Building such that it will preserve its character and appearance and setting, in accordance with Policies BE15 and BE19 of the UDP and advice within PPG15. Overall, the application is therefore considered acceptable and recommended for approval subject to conditions.

220