Agenda item

7.1

RESOLVED: That (a) the applications now submitted for permission to develop land under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Regulations made thereunder and for consent under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1989, be decided, granted or refused as stated in the report to this Committee for this date in respect of Case No. 12/02617/CHU and other applications considered be amended as in the minutes of this meeting, and the requisite notices issued; the granting of any permission or consent shall not constitute approval, permission or consent by this Committee or the Council for any other purpose;

(b) following consideration of a correction to the report that the third sentence of the penultimate paragraph on page 60 should read ‘This has been a clear and consistent development plan policy since 2008’, as outlined in a supplementary report circulated at the meeting, an application for planning permission for demolition of buildings on plots 3 and 4, erection of retail unit including garden centre, car dealership and drive-through coffee shop and provision of associated car parking accommodation on plot 5 and partial removal of embankment and stockpiling of soil on plots 3 and 4 at land and buildings at Meadowhall Way, Meadowhall Drive, Vulcan Road and Weedon Street (Case No. 12/01017/FUL) be refused as the Committee considered that (i) the proposal failed the sequential approach since there was a sequentially preferable site at Moorfoot/St. Mary’s Gate on the edge of the City Centre and it was therefore contrary to paragraphs 24 and 27 of the National Planning Policy Framework, (ii) Sheffield City Centre was in a uniquely vulnerable position being in a fragile state with two major retail-led regeneration schemes at a critical stage in their planned development and delivery, and given this context it was considered that the proposal will have a harmful impact on investor and retailer confidence in planned investment in Sheffield City Centre which could undermine the delivery of these schemes which were critical to ensuring the future vitality and viability of the city centre (and identified as key regeneration schemes in Core Strategy Policy CS14), and as such, the proposal was therefore contrary to paragraph 26 of the National Planning Policy Framework and (iii) the proposal will result in major non-food retail development in an out of city centre location and result in the significant expansion of Meadowhall which was contrary to Core Strategy Policies CS7 and CS14 and Unitary Development Plan Policy S8;

(c) following consideration of an additional representation, and subject to an amended description and an amendment to condition 2, as outlined in a supplementary report circulated at the meeting, an application for planning permission for a single storey rear extension and first floor rear extension to dwellinghouse (as per amended plans received 1.11.12) at 21 Twitchill Drive (Case No. 12/02949/FUL) be granted, conditionally;

(Note. During this item the Deputy Chair, Councillor Ibrar Hussain, took the Chair in the absence of the Chair, Councillor Alan Law.)

(d) notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation, consideration of applications for listed building consent and planning permission for retention of existing wall and associated railings and gates (retrospective application) at Viper Rooms, 35 Carver Street (Case Nos. 12/02941/LBC and 12/02884/FUL) be deferred pending further discussions between the applicant and officers;

(e) following consideration of additional representations, as outlined in a supplementary report circulated at the meeting, an application for planning permission for use of building as House in Multiple Occupation for 8 occupants, and replacement of basement level door with fire escape window on front elevation to provide a 1-person studio unit (use class C3) (in accordance with amended drawings 17.10.12) at 102 Harcourt Road (Case No. 12/02793/FUL) be granted, conditionally; and

7.6

(f) (i) an application for planning permission for retention of summerhouse, raised decking and climbing frame and use of land as domestic garden area (retrospective application) at land adjacent to the Old Dairy 8 White Lane, Gleadless (Case No. 12/00392/FUL) be refused as the Committee considered that (a) the use of land as an extension of the domestic curtilage/garden area of the Old Dairy was inappropriate development that leads to the encroachment of urban development into the Green Belt which would detrimentally affect the open character and appearance of the Green Belt and was, therefore, contrary to the Urban Development Plan Policies GE1 and GE4 and Policy CS71 of the Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework and (b) the summer house, decking area and climbing frame were inappropriate development, and by the virtue of their size, siting, design and appearance of the Green Belt and lead to the encroachment of urban development into the Green Belt. The proposal was, therefore, contrary to Urban Development Plan Policies GE1, GE3 and GE4 of the Unitary Development Plan, Policy CS71 of the Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework and (ii) authority be given to the Director of Development Services or Head of Planning to take all necessary steps, including enforcement action and the institution of legal proceedings, if necessary, to secure the removal of the unauthorised structures, discontinuance of the land as domestic garden area and reinstatement to a natural appearance.