The IKEA in Sheffield thread

[Blackbeard]

SCC turned it down because they felt it did not comply with the adopted planning policy and could damage retail in the city centre. They said it did not pass the sequential test for retail. See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-23182687

 

The planning inspector didn't agree with them. They said it did pass the sequential test. See: http://www.njlconsulting.co.uk/news-and-blogs/news/national-planning-policy-framework-sequential-test-more-guidance-please/

 

What ever happened to Eric Pickles?

[Cyclone]

This was the OP that said the Council had spent millions "fighting " the Ikea application, which is quite simply untrue.

 

The Council have not turned down any planning application from Ikea. This one was approved after the normal discussions you would expect of a development of this size and the previous one they made for the old YE site on Parkway Avenue was withdrawn by Ikea following a number of objections being received.

 

The Council have not "fought" the Ikea application at all. It desn't cost much to deal with a planning application, they already employ development management staff to do this, so processing an application like this doesn't cost them anything extra.

 

The application they "fought" and turned down was Next Home Store. Turning down an application doesn't cost much. As I metioned, the staff involved already work for the Council, so there is no additional cost, unless you have to pay for some specalist advice you don't have the expertise for in-house. The cost actually comes after you turn down the application, at the planning appeal, where you engage a barrister to represent you. That costs a few thousands, not "millions" or anything like it.

 

People bandy costs around and say things cost "millions" when they haven't got the faintest idea how much those things really cost. They really ought to know better.

 

It would be interesting to see just how "few" a few thousand was. Barristers are really pretty expensive, and you don't normally instruct one directly, you instruct a solicitor who instructs a barrister (although perhaps the council have their own in house counsel who directly instruct a barrister).

I bet it's more considerably more than a few thousand to represent at an appeal though. Staff time DOES have to be accounted for, they don't work for free. I'd be surprised if it wasn't a few tens of thousands when you properly account for the cost.

[AndrewC]

It would be interesting to see just how "few" a few thousand was. Barristers are really pretty expensive, and you don't normally instruct one directly, you instruct a solicitor who instructs a barrister (although perhaps the council have their own in house counsel who directly instruct a barrister).

I bet it's more considerably more than a few thousand to represent at an appeal though. Staff time DOES have to be accounted for, they don't work for free. I'd be surprised if it wasn't a few tens of thousands when you properly account for the cost.

 

But not 'millions', which I think was the general gist of what planner1 was saying.

[Penistone999]

SCC turned it down because they felt it did not comply with the adopted planning policy and could damage retail in the city centre. They said it did not pass the sequential test for retail. See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-23182687

 

The planning inspector didn't agree with them. They said it did pass the sequential test. See: http://www.njlconsulting.co.uk/news-and-blogs/news/national-planning-policy-framework-sequential-test-more-guidance-please/

 

How is that going ? :hihi:

 

Any completion date for the retail quarter ? :hihi:

 

2089 ?

[Planner1]

It would be interesting to see just how "few" a few thousand was. Barristers are really pretty expensive, and you don't normally instruct one directly, you instruct a solicitor who instructs a barrister (although perhaps the council have their own in house counsel who directly instruct a barrister).

I bet it's more considerably more than a few thousand to represent at an appeal though. Staff time DOES have to be accounted for, they don't work for free. I'd be surprised if it wasn't a few tens of thousands when you properly account for the cost.

SCC have an in-house legal team and can instruct a barrister if needed. Barrister costs could be anything, depends how good a barrister you want.

 

All councils have a development management team, whose job it is to deal with planning applications. They have a budget for doing this.

 

If you were interested in how much the Next appeal cost the council, you could send in an FOI request.

[Veritas]

Slightly off topic has anyone purchased an item of furniture from Ikea a sofa in particular and if so are you happy with it ?.

 

Bought a sofa and a matching sofa-bed 13 years ago from Ikea in Genoa although they don't get used everyday they are still in very good shape and have proved to be excellent value

[paula1]

I have had several shelving units, lighting, chairs, sofas and drawer sets in the past and every single one was very easy to put together (with no bits missing), have lasted well and decent quality. I find them good value for money. I love their Market Street bit for all things dining and kitchen use, you find unusual things in there. A lot of my table ware and bedding is from there too, great value for money also.

[charvel]

Can't wait for an ikea in Sheffield - too far to go to Nottingham!!

[WalkleyIan]

by way of warning

 

Reading Ikea 4 hour car park delays

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-36782534

[boston]

by way of warning

 

Reading Ikea 4 hour car park delays

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-36782534

 

I can see the traffic problem around the Sheffield Ikea being much worse than Reading, given the vicinity of Meadowhall, Sheffield Arena, and the Valley Centertainment.

 

The area is already at over capacity with traffic levels, how can this development not increase upon this (and i feel cause gridlock, throughout that whole part of the city)

 

I appreciate the jobs factor, and other benefits but it surely should have been located at another junction of the M1, or even land on the Rotherham side of the viaduct !!!