In 2003 Asda were planning to build a new supermarket on the site of the Sheffield
Wednesday training ground at Middlewood Road, Hillsborough. The area is already
plagued with traffic problems and the new development, if built would have
destroyed the local shopping area and undermined the existing five supermarkets.
of work was carried out by Sheffield Friends of the Earth, The Green Party and
many local residents to stop the development.
public meeting was held on Friday 7th February in Hillsborough with local
residents to create an action group to stop this development.
residents at the meeting made the following points:
The land is actually owned by the Council and not Sheffield Wednesday.
The loading bay will be situated next to housing at Winn Gardens.
Gilders Car Showroom may be shutting down soon. If ASDA build a store on the
training ground this would be an ideal location for an ASDA petrol station.
It was suggested that 463 car parking spaces would be provided.
Residents were not sure of store opening times and delivery times for large
At some point in the future a road may be built linking the site with Clay
In the Hillsborough area 23 of 172 shops are vacant . 11 of 53 shops are
vacant around Middlewood Road. Both of these areas have above average levels
of vacant shops.
If people decide not to shop at Morrisons, for example, and instead visit
ASDA then it will create more traffic crossing through Hillsborough.
If people making the planning decision attend more than 15 Wednesday matches
they aren’t allowed to make a decision on the proposal.
Asda recently developed a store at Handsworth. To
find out how this development affected their community a couple of people had a
look The development at Hillsborough could suffer similar problems. Here are the
Had a look round the Asda at Handsworth the
other night with Janet. It's BIG! Since it opened 3 fruit & veg shops, 2
butchers, 1 bread shop & 1 newsagents have closed in Handsworth. Asda are
now moving into white goods & clothing (the original planning
permission prevents them having a chemist or post office). They have not
been granted planning permission for an extension, so they are putting a
mezzanine floor into the present building. There have been 3 public meetings
arranged by Asda about this, but all have been poorly publicised (no posters
in the shop - even the staff don't know about them). While the work is being
completed they have put up a huge extension, which they say does not need
planning permission as it is temporary (for 32 weeks).
There is no £1 charge on the trolleys which
leads to many being abandoned. The car park backs onto Richmond Park
Crescent, with only a small evergreen shrub screen. Asda have also bought
land just behind the store which had outline planning permission for a pub
and McDonalds, they have applied for full planning permission, but
management say the project has been shelved (objections in by end of March!)
There are lorry deliveries every hour on the hour through the night,
management have said they could be timed to arrive together every three
hours! There is lots of litter on the pavement from the store, the lights
are sequenced to allow 5 cars at a time into the car park, but were causing
huge traffic jams when I visited (5.30-6). The pavement is very narrow on
the far side of the road which causes problems for people with prams etc.
Janet was fairly sceptical about us winning in the long term, but said
we needed to come up with terms & conditions under which we would accept the
scheme & make sure that promised features - crossings, play areas, pavement
widening happened before the store was built, as she says Asda made many
promises to the community which they have not kept.
Two other public meetings have been organised and
well attended by residents and councillors. David Blunkett has written a letter
agreeing with us. The Environment Agency are also opposed to this scheme.
Why the Development was Rejected
Local Planning Authority consider that a need for the proposed store has not
been demonstrated and that it also fails the sequential test laid out in
national Planning Policy Guidance, Note 6 - Town Centres and Retail Development
and subsequent government statements.
2 The Local Planning Authority consider that the proposal would have a harmful
impact on the vitality and viability of Hillsborough District Centre and
Middlewood Local Centre. In this respect the proposal would be contrary to
Policy S5 of the Sheffield Unitary Development Plan.
3 The proposal would result in the loss of playing fields without the provision
of an acceptable alternative. In this respect the proposal is contrary to Policy
LR7 of the Sheffield Unitary Development Plan.
4 The Local Planning Authority consider that the applicants have failed to
demonstrate that traffic associated with the proposed development will not have
an adverse impact on the local highway and transportation system.
1. LOCATION AND PROPOSAL
1.1 The application relates to the Sheffield Wednesday Football Club (SWFC)
training ground situated between Middlewood Road and the River Don, to the north
west of Hillsborough. To the north of the site is the Winn Gardens housing
estate. Adjoining the site to the west are the Park and Ride facilities
associated with the Middlewood Supertram terminus and Thorn Lea, an elderly
persons home. To the south of the site are commercial premises occupied by
1.2 The site is currently accessed off Middlewood Road to the south of Thorn
Lea, into a car parking area. Beyond this are the SWFC training facilities
comprising 3 grass football pitches, an indoor training pitch covered by a dome,
an artificial pitch and buildings associated with the training facilities. The
site is surrounded by concrete and wire mesh fencing.
1.3 This outline planning application proposes an improved access close to the
existing from which a road would run into the site to serve a proposed Asda
local centre. This would be constructed mostly on the site of the existing grass
pitches and buildings. The application seeks approval of the siting of the main
elements of the proposal.
1.4 The proposed store would be located in the northern part of the site,
adjoining Winn Gardens and the Supertram Park and Ride facilities (although not
part of the application site, an area for possible extension and links to the
Park and Ride is shown). The store would have a net sales area of 4,180 sq.m.
(45,000 sq.ft.). A service road would feed round the perimeter of the site to a
service area between Winn Gardens and the proposed store.
1.5 A total of 463 car parking spaces would be provided, mostly to the front of
the store. This would include parking for disabled, expectant mothers, parent
and child and staff.
1.6 The existing all-weather covered pitch would be retained and three new
five-a-side pitches with changing facilities and parking for 47 cars provided.
1.7 Existing tree screening along the River Don would be retained as much as
possible and supplemented with new planting. New tree and hedge screening would
also be provided around the boundary. The submitted plans also show grassed and
landscaped area within the site. A proposed pedestrian link to a riverside path
is also shown.
1.8 The applicants claim the proposal would create 400 jobs.
2. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
2.1 A full planning application was submitted at the time of this application
for the re-siting of the SWFC training facilities to land at Nether Lane,
Ecclesfield (the former Shardlows Sports and Social Club). This included a large
2.2 The application for the proposed re-siting was placed on the agenda for the
North and West Area Board on 25 March 2003 with a recommendation for refusal on
Green Belt and amenity grounds. The applicants withdrew the application prior to
the Board meeting (Ref: 03/00004/FUL).
2.3 No alternative application for re-siting of the training facilities has been
3. SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS
3.1 The application has been advertised in the press and notices posted on site.
Local residents have been notified directly. There has been significant press
3.2 Objections to the proposal were received very quickly from the immediate
area and Sheffield 6 in general. To date 121 letters and a petition signed by
161 people have been received on the following grounds:
- the proposal would have an impact on local shops and the Hillsborough shopping
- there are adequate supermarkets in the locality
- the proposal would be contrary to UDP policies and national and regional
- it would lead to increased traffic in the area causing congestion and problems
at major junctions in the area
- increased traffic would create a hazard for schoolchildren
- increased traffic would impact on public transport movement, especially
Supertram, leading to delays
- will create more hazard for cyclists
- loss of open space
- fume, light and noise pollution from the development
- impact on the amenity of local residents and occupiers of Thorn Lea
- other brownfield sites in the area
- SWFC should work to improve the area in view of problems caused on match days
- money raised will not solve SWFC financial situation
- SWFC supporters but not at the expense of the damage the proposal will cause
in the area
3.3 Helen Jackson MP has objected on the grounds:
- potential traffic chaos and congestion in the area
- serious effect on the viability of businesses in Hillsborough.
3.4 Sheffield Chamber of Trade object on the grounds that it would have a
seriously detrimental impact upon local shops and the Hillsborough District
3.5 Sport England have objected to the proposal on the grounds that the
development would lead to the permanent loss of part of the existing playing
3.6 Initially, very few letters of support were received. However, following
publicity by Asda and SWFC, including an information pack sent to supporters
urging them to write in and support the proposal, 134 letters have been received
to date. Of the letters 25% were from Sheffield 6, the remainder from further
afield including Bury, Leicester and Norwich.
3.7 The points raised include:
- the proposal will provide a much needed cash injection to SWFC
- it will not create a significant increase in traffic
- integration with the Supertram system
- create new jobs
- provide competition to existing stores and offer more choice
- keep shoppers in the area
- will serve north Sheffield
- benefit the community
- the importance of SWFC to the City.
4. PLANNING ASSESSMENT
4.1 The application site is within an area identified as Open Space in the
Unitary Development Plan (UDP). The surrounding area is primarily identified as
residential although there is a Fringe Industry and Business Area to the south.
The nearest existing shopping areas are the local centre at Middlewood
Road/Catch Bar Lane junction and the Hillsborough District Shopping Centre
4.2 The proposal has to be examined by a number of issues in the light of local
and national policies and guidelines.
4.3 Retail Policy Issues
4.3.1 Policy S1 of the UDP states, amongst other things, that major new retail
development (i.e. above 2,500 sq.m. gross) will be concentrated within and at
the edge of the Central Shopping Area and District Shopping Centres. The current
proposal clearly does not comply with that policy.
4.3.2 Policy S4 states that retail development will be promoted within District
Shopping Centres and where there are no suitable sites within such Centres, at
their edges. One of the main reasons for this policy is that District Centres
are accessible to all sections of the community particularly those without the
use of a private car. The recent completion of the mini-transport interchange at
Hillsborough District Centre underlines this.
4.3.3 Policy S5 states that retail development outside of District Centres will
be permitted where certain criteria are satisfied. These criteria include:
- it would not undermine the vitality and viability of the City Centre or any
District Shopping Centre as a whole, either taken alone or cumulatively with
other recent or proposed development; and
- it would not jeopardise private sector investment needed to safeguard the
vitality and viability of the Central Shopping Area or District Shopping Centres
or put at risk the strategy or proposals for promotion and regeneration of those
- it would be easily accessible by public and private transport and provide
satisfactory access for people with disabilities and people arriving by foot,
cycle or public transport; and
- it would not have a significant harmful effect on public transport services or
priority measures or on other movement on the surrounding road network as
existing or, where appropriate, as proposed to be improved; and
- the traffic generated would not result in a significant increase in the number
and length of customer trips; and
- it would not take up land where other uses are required nor give rise to
shortages of land for those uses which are preferred.
4.3.4 Criteria a) and b) are examined further in this section. The other
criteria will be examined later in the report.
4.3.5 The application should also be considered in the light of National
Planning Policy Guidance Note 6: Town Centres and Retail Development (PPG6) and
subsequent clarification of that policy, including a statement in 1999 by the
then Planning Minister, Richard Caborn.
4.3.6 The Government's clarification of PPG6 states that the proposers of
development that is out of centre or not in accordance with a development plan,
such as this, have to demonstrate that the development is needed and that the
sequential approach has been followed. Need, Sequential Approach and Impact will
be assessed below.
4.4.1 The applicants' assessment of retail need concludes that a new store is
needed both to remedy local deficiencies and to accommodate spending growth.
4.4.2 From calculations based on information from a household survey of north
Sheffield, the applicants conclude that superstores in north Sheffield are
overtrading (have higher than expected turnovers) and that there is an outflow
of expenditure to stores outside the study area. A large superstore fulfilling a
main food shopping function is therefore needed to reduce congestion at existing
stores and reduce journey times.
4.4.3 The original study area in which the applicants considered need, covered
almost half of Sheffield. Irrespective of whether a store is needed for this
area, the applicants have not demonstrated that the proposed Asda is of the
right scale to remedy any need. Government guidance is that the scale of
proposals should be "appropriately related to the centre – whether town,
district or local – the development seeks to serve" (Caborn statement). New
shops "should be … of a size appropriate to the size of that centre and its
catchment area". Hillsborough, the nearest centre to the proposal, does not
serve a catchment as extensive as the original applicants' study area.
4.4.4 In response to officers request, the applicants examined the need for the
store in the more immediate 'core area' surrounding the proposal. They calculate
that in this area there is an excess of expenditure over provision (i.e.
capacity) of £43.4m in 2002 – very close to the expected Asda turnover figure of
£43m. However, their calculations are considered flawed since they allocate some
of the existing shopping floorspace in the area to shoppers from outside the
area, without making a similar allowance for people living in the area to go
outside the area to shop. The applicants estimate that people living in the area
currently spend only £28.8m outside it. This is less that the store's turnover
of £43m. Therefore there is no current capacity for a store for the scale
4.4.5 If there were a need for a modern food store in either the original study
area of the 'core area', this store is not in the right place to meet it. The
area of the proposal is already well supplied with centres and food shops –
Middlewood Centre, with a Netto, is 400m away and the centre of Hillsborough,
with its three supermarkets, is 1.5km away.
4.4.6 Ministerial guidance says that any demonstration of need for retail
floorspace should be based on the types of goods it would sell. However, the
applicants' argument that the store is needed to accommodate spending growth is
based on an assessment of growth in spending in convenience businesses. Growth
in spending on convenience goods is almost non-existent and growth in spending
in convenience businesses is due to growth in spending on the non-food goods
that they sell. So the applicants are trying to justify a store that would sell
convenience goods by growth in expenditure on non-food items.
4.4.7 There is therefore, no need for the store to accommodate growth in food
spending and the applicants have not tried to show that it is needed to
accommodate growth in non-food spending.
4.4.8 To conclude, no convincing evidence has been provided of a retail need for
the store or the 'new centre' in either the original study area or the smaller
'core area'. "A failure to demonstrate both the need for such proposals and that
a sequential approach has been applied in selecting the application site would
normally justify the refusal of planning permission unless there were weighty
additional material considerations."
4.5 The Sequential Approach
4.5.1 The sequential approach means that first preference should be for town
centre sites, where suitable sites or buildings suitable for conversion are
available, followed by edge-of-centre sites, district and local centres and only
then out-of-centre sites in locations that are accessible by a choice of means
of transport. Government guidance is that the key question for the sequential
approach is not whether a shop's format can be accommodated but whether there is
any reason why the goods it sells cannot be sold from town centres. Asda's
product offer includes recorded music and video, toys, electrical appliances,
stationery and greeting cards. Most Asda stores sell 'George' clothing. George
space in-store ranges from 4,000 to 10,000 sq.m. The applicants have failed to
demonstrate that the non-food items could not be sold from vacant units in
Hillsborough and the City Centre and from the New Retail Quarter.
4.5.2 The original study are in which the applicants assessed need, included the
entire City Centre. This includes vacant units and the proposed New Retail
Quarter. In terms of the 'sequential approach' the New Retail Quarter is
suitable and available for retail development within a reasonable period of
time. It will have sufficient floorspace to accommodate growth in spending in
the study area. It is preferable to any non-central site for developments
selling the type of non-food goods that Asda tend to sell and that could
otherwise be sold in a City Centre location.
4.5.3 Both the original study area and the core area include Hillsborough
District Shopping Centre. There are vacant units here between Morrisons and the
rest of the centre where the non-food goods could be sold.
4.5.4 To conclude, although there is no alternative site for the store in the
Hillsborough area, its non-food goods could be sold in vacant units in
Hillsborough and in the New Retail Quarter.
4.6.1 Policy S5 criteria (a) and (b) require impact on District Centres and the
City Centre to be assessed. PPG6 also requires the impact on local centres to be
4.6.2 The main concern is the proposal's impact on Hillsborough. The applicants
state that the Asda would reduce overtrading in stores in the Study Area,
"improving their ability to perform their proper retail functions adequately".
Therefore there would be no significant adverse impact. The applicants estimate
trade losses at 2007 (the design year) to be:
Impact of Asda %
Co-op, Middlewood Road, Hillsborough (DC) 14
Kwiksave, Hillsborough Arcade, Hillsborough (DC) 20
Morrisons, Hillsborough (DC) 20
Other stores in Hillsborough 12
Local Centre Stores
Netto, Middlewood Road, Hillsborough 29
Netto, South Road, Walkley 22
Stores Outside Centres
Lidl, Halifax Road, Wadsley Bridge 27
Somerfield, Kilner Way, Halifax Road 17
4.6.3 Officers have some reservations about the assumptions in the applicants'
- The applicants increase the turnover of 6 of the 9 stores in the study area
'to more accurately reflect perceived trading conditions'. This is an arbitrary
and subjective adjustment that has the effect of reducing impact.
- The applicants assume that only 44% of Asda's trade will be drawn from shops
within the 'core area'. This assumption is low. It would mean that most of
Asda's trade would be taken from stores outside the core area. It would be more
reasonable to assume that Asda's draw would be similar to the proportion of main
food shopping currently retained by shops in the core area – 58%.
4.6.4 By reversing the applicants' adjustment to the Co-op and Morrisons at
Hillsborough, and making a more reasonable trade draw assumption of 58%, and
adjusting individual shops' trade draws pro rata, it can be calculated that
convenience shops in Hillsborough would lose 28% of their trade.
4.7 Effect on Hillsborough District Centre
4.7.1 The applicants' evidence suggests that Morrisons is already overtrading
and that even with the impact of Asda, Morrisons would be operating at above
'benchmark' levels (those expected on the basis of company average sales
densities). However, by making the reasonable adjustments described above it can
be calculated that they would be operating at 15% below benchmark levels.
4.7.2 Even assuming the applicants' figures are correct, they do not give
evidence to support their claim that trade withdrawal can benefit the Centre.
The applicants acknowledge that strong pedestrian flows are encouraged through
the location of the Co-op superstore at the northern end of the Centre and the
Morrisons supermarket (and associated car parking) and transport interchange at
the southern end. Reducing Morrisons' or the Co-op's trade is likely to have a
harmful rather than beneficial effect on the Centre by reducing the likelihood
of linked trips and strength of pedestrian flows. Hillsborough's vacancies tend
to occur in smaller units in peripheral areas such as the Hillsborough Barracks
Mall – which links Morrisons with the Centre. It is considered that loss of
trade to Morrisons at Hillsborough Barracks and the consequent reduction in
pedestrian flows, will increase the likelihood that these units remain vacant.
4.7.3 Therefore the proposal will have a predominantly harmful effect, contrary
to Policy S5(a).
4.8 Effect on Local Centres
4.8.1 Even after adjusting the turnover figure for Netto at Middlewood Road so
that it reflects company averages, the applicants project that it will lose 29%
of its trade. The Netto is the anchor convenience store in the Centre. The
Centre has a high vacancy rate – 20%. It is considered the proposed Asda would
have a harmful impact on the Netto and consequently on Middlewood Centre itself,
contrary to PPG6.
4.9.1 On retail policy grounds the proposal should be refused because the
applicants have not demonstrated a need for the store. A failure to demonstrate
need justifies refusal.
4.9.2 It also fails the sequential approach insofar as the non-food goods it is
likely to sell could be sold in Hillsborough and the Central Shopping Area. It
should therefore be refused as contrary to PPG6 as clarified by Government
guidance in the Caborn statement of February 1999.
4.9.3 The development would have a harmful impact on Hillsborough District
Centre and Middlewood Local Centre, contrary to Policy S5 criteria (a) and PPG6.
4.10 Loss of Open Space
4.10.1 Policy LR7 of the UDP states that in Open Space Areas the development of
recreation space for non-recreational uses will be permitted only if, amongst
other things, well-designed, new recreation space of equivalent area and
facilities were created, the new recreation space was in the same catchment area
or part of the city where provision of recreation space is below minimum
guidelines, and provision of recreation space within the catchment area of the
development site would not fall below the minimum guideline after development
had taken place.
4.10.2 An open space provision calculation for the site shows that the catchment
area is well below the minimum guidelines for both informal and formal open
space. The overall provision of open space is 1.95 hectares per thousand
population, well below the minimum guideline of 6.0 hectares per thousand
4.10.3 Sport England are a statutory consultee on any proposals affecting
playing fields, whether in public or private ownership. They oppose the
development of playing fields unless exceptional circumstances apply. In
relation to the application the only exceptional circumstances which could apply
relate to the replacement of the lost playing fields by an equivalent or better
quality and of equivalent or greater quantity in a suitable location and subject
to equivalent or better management arrangements. As no replacement is being
considered at the present time, Sport England have objected to the proposal.
4.10.4 In view of the loss of the playing fields and no replacement, the
proposal would not comply with Policy LR7 and should therefore be refused.
However, Members should be aware that the applicants have stated they would be
willing to enter into a legal agreement to provide suitable replacement
facilities if Members are minded to grant planning permission for the proposed
4.11 Traffic and Transportation Issues
4.11.1 Policy S5, criteria c), d) and e) makes reference to the need for any
retail proposal to be easily accessible, not have a significant harmful effect
on public transport or movement on the surrounding road network or result in a
significant increase in the number and length of customer trips.
4.11.2 Highway Officers have examined the Transport Assessment submitted by the
applicants. This involves mathematical modelling, analysing similar sized Asda
stores in similar locations. From this it is possible to estimate the likely
increase in traffic on the highway networks resulting from the proposed
4.11.3 Examples of the projected increases in traffic for the peak hour period
Saturday 2004 base approaching Leppings Lane southbound from Catch Bar Lane
(333+196) equates to 529 vehicles.
Saturday 2004 base + development traffic approaching Leppings Lane from Catch
Bar Lane (355+359) equates to 714 vehicles.
This represents an increase of 35%.
Saturday 2004 base approaching Middlewood Road from Catch Bar Lane of 510
Saturday 2004 base + development traffic approaching Middlewood Road from Catch
Bar Lane of 704 vehicles.
This represents an increase of 38%.
4.11.4 The impact of traffic related to the proposed development on the various
junctions surrounding the site has been examined using computer modelling.
4.11.5 The applicants have commented on:
- the frequency of tram operation on Middlewood Road, 10 minute frequency in
each direction which equates to 12 trams an hour with 5 minute headways;
- the tram route runs mainly on-street and controlled at major junctions by
traffic signals, resulting in a reliable, regular and frequent, high quality
public transport link.
4.11.6 Despite acknowledging the presence of trams on the Middlewood Road
corridor, the applicants' model takes no account of their frequent movements on
Middlewood Road through the Wadsley Lane and Catch Bar Lane junctions.
Subsequently, the model and generated output does not represent the real
on-street traffic conditions in terms of queue lengths and delay.
4.11.7 Trams have full priority through these two junctions on Middlewood Road
and due to the frequency (of on average 1 every 5 minutes, although there are
occasions when trams cross in either direction) there is frequent random
disruption to vehicular traffic, particularly during the pm peak 1600-1800.
4.11.8 Wadsley Lane, Leppings Lane, Catch Bar Lane and Parkside Road are the key
entry/exit points into the surrounding residential areas of Hillsborough,
Wisewood, Loxley and Worrall.
4.11.9 During the pm peak, queue lengths on Wadsley Lane regularly extend back
from the stopline at Wadsley Lane on average for 150m and during peaks within
the pm peak this queue length can reach 190m. The applicants' model for the
Friday 2004 base 1700-1800 identifies a queue of 20m.
4.11.10 In the same pm period, queue lengths on Parkside road regularly extend
from the stopline at the junction with Middlewood Road to the junction with
Catch Bar Lane i.e. 155m. The applicants' model for the Friday 2004 base
1700-1800 identifies a 45m queue.
4.11.11 There are other inaccuracies between the Friday 2004 base model and
on-street conditions in terms of predicted queue lengths, the reason for these
inaccuracies is the inability of the applicants' data to accurately model trams
on a fixed network. A more appropriate modelling tool would be a
micro-simulation package, where the random arrival of trams and reaction of the
highway network can be more accurately represented to give a true picture of
queue lengths and delay.
4.11.12 Because the base model does not represent the current on-street
conditions, it is inappropriate to comment on the significance of development
traffic on the network. In summary, without a confident and robust assessment of
the highways and transportation issues (in particular surrounding Catch Bar Lane
taking account of Supertram), possibly also suggesting the implementation of
mitigating improvements, it is currently impossible to support t he application
from a Highways point of view. Any transportation benefits of an Asda store
serving the north of Sheffield have not been demonstrated.
5. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 The Local Planning Authority is fully aware of the depth of feeling this
application has produced, not just among the supporters of SWFC, but also those
who wish to see the fortunes of this long established club, and its place in the
5.2 The applicants state that for such an important component of city life to be
in jeopardy has very serious planning consequences. The consider the ability of
the proposal to address these issues as part of SWFC's, "stability plan" is an
important material consideration.
5.3 The Local Planning Authority consider, however, on balance, that the
proposed development would have an adverse impact in other material areas. The
conflict with retail policies at national and local level, the impact on
existing shopping centres, the loss of open space and the impact on the highway
and transportation network are all material planning considerations that
outweigh the financial implications of Sheffield Wednesday Football Club.
Example Objection Letters
The following letters were sent to the Head of
Planning. These may be of use to other people campaigning against other
Department of Planning, Transport and Housing
Sheffield, S1 2SH
Proposed ASDA development at Middlewood Road
writing on behalf of Sheffield Friends of the Earth to object to this proposed
development on the following grounds:
The development will increase traffic the area, leading to more congestion,
noise, and pollution.
There is currently a thriving shopping area in Hillsborough providing
services and employment for local people. The new development will draw
trade away from these local shops.
This development will result in Sheffield Wednesday FC moving their training
ground from Middlewood Road to a green field site near Ecclesfield. While
this may help their financial situation, development of green field site
near to Sheffield is not in the interest of the local community.
Please could you keep me informed of the progress of this planning application.
Planning, Transportation and Highways
I am writing to you regarding the outline planning
application (03/00005/OUT) for the development of an ASDA supermarket at
Sheffield Wednesday’s training ground on Middlewood Road.
I would like to formally object to the development
on the following grounds:
Traffic and Pollution
I believe that the three main areas suffering from
traffic pollution in Sheffield are located around the M1/Meadowhall area, the
City Centre and Penistone Road. If the ASDA development is given the go-ahead it
will create more traffic problems around Penistone Road and Hillsborough.
More traffic will also be created as people travel
from one side of Hillsborough to reach the proposed store located at the other
side of Hillsborough. This will increase traffic problems in an already
Public transport is often delayed and unpredictable
in the Hillsborough area due to high levels of traffic. If Sheffield City
Council is serious about reducing traffic growth to sustainable levels then good
quality public transport is essential. These objectives, in my opinion, would be
threatened if the ASDA store were built, as public transport would be further
undermined due to increased congestion.
Loss of Shops
There are already five to six supermarkets and many
local and district shops in the Hillsborough area. I feel that allowing ASDA to
develop another supermarket will inevitably lead to the loss of exiting
supermarkets and local community shops.
When assessing this planning application I believe
that consideration should be given to the inevitable job losses that will take
place in the area.
I also believe that the Hillsborough area suffers
from higher than average rates of vacant shops. This suggests that further
large-scale retail developments are neither required nor desired by local
Loss of green space
I do not agree that the planning application should
be granted, as the store will result in the loss of green space.