LibertyBell Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Tesco aren't known for giving up. They could appeal still couldn't they? They've got deep pockets for top lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptigga Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Tesco aren't known for giving up. They could appeal still couldn't they? They've got deep pockets for top lawyers. They'll just submit an identical application in two years time. I can't see them selling the land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Scarlet Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Perhaps it was the sheer weight of objections. The adjacent conservation area is also unique to that location.More than a thousand objections were received and noted for the Nether Edge Tesco on Abbeydale Road and similarly, it is on the edge of the Nether Edge conservation area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkleyIan Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Anyone attend the public enquiry this week, or know the result of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumpyroads Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Found a detailed report here: http://nwsheffield.org/2010/05/14/commonside-tesco-planning-appeal-%E2%80%93-final-day/ No decision yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scargill Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 any idea when a decision is due? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox20thc Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 (edited) The decision came through today on the appeal by Tesco against Sheffield City Council’s planning decision refusing permission to erect a two-storey building on the site of 218 Springvale Road, formerly belonging to Hollies Filling Station. The Appeal was rejected. The main grounds for the decision were road safety, parking concerns and lack of any need for such a store. Planning Inspector Wildsmith also made reference to the effect on the local economy of a further chain stiore being sited in the Walkley Commonside area. There is now a limited time for Tesco to appeal Wildsmith’s decision, if they believe they have a legal argument, by going to the Administrative Court in London. http://nwsheffield.org/2010/06/28/commonside-tesco-appeal-decision-received/ http://nwsheffield.org/files/2010/06/commonsidetescodecision.pdf Edited June 28, 2010 by fox20thc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greengeek Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 It's a little bit hypocritical denying this store. Look at the carnage caused in Crookes by two supermarkets, coupled with the narrow minded people that absolutely positively have to park as close to the door as humanly possible, and wagons that stop with no regard for other road users. If I was the SCC, I'd get the traffic wardens to follow a couple of these wagons around, soon earn their keep. I was looking forward to this Tesco, as I much prefer shopping there than the overpriced co-op and cramped Sainsburys. If local stores are complaining about loss of trade, surely you should be looking at what you do, not what others are doing. If you provide good service, good prices and are convenient...you have nothing to worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharston Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 The Appeal was rejected. The main grounds for the decision were road safety, parking concerns and lack of any need for such a store. Planning Inspector Wildsmith also made reference to the effect on the local economy of a further chain store being sited in the Walkley Commonside area. Wow. Since when was "need" a planning consideration? Planning officers were always druming it into us that we weren't there to interfer with the free market, if there was no "need" the market would kill off the surplus. Wey hey, by the way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharston Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 It's a little bit hypocritical denying this store. Look at the carnage caused in Crookes by two supermarkets The council neither permitted or considered denying the two supermarkets in Crookes. They are pre-existing properties with pre-existing planning consents. The council only has the ability to deny permission for changes of use. Sainsbury's used to be a Co-Op, so has pre-existing supermarket retail use permission, and the Co-Op used to be Kwik-Save, and so has pre-existing supermarket retail use permission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now