Retail Assessment. Proposed Retail Development at The Malthouse Estate, Brighton Road, Shoreham by Sea. Prepared on Behalf of Lidl (UK) GmbH

Transcription

1 Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham by Sea Prepared on Behalf of Lidl (UK) GmbH JCCxxxx vx Date JPW0201 v1 November 2013 Planning & Development

2 Quality Management Prepared by: AR/CT Proofread by: RB Checked by: RB Purpose: Planning submission Date: 29 November 2013 Version: v1 Project Number: JPW0201 Document Reference: R Retail Assessment JPW0201 v1 This report has been produced by RPS within the terms of the contract with the client and taking account of the resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above. RPS Planning and Development Ltd. Registered in England No Centurion Court, 85 Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, OX14 4RY. A Member of the RPS Group Plc. RPS Planning & Development Ltd Park House Greyfriars Road Cardiff CF10 3AF T: F: E: rpsca@rpsgroup.com W: Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea i RPS Planning & Development

3 Contents Quality Management...i Contents...ii 1 Introduction...1 Purpose and Scope...1 Site Description...1 The Proposed Development...1 About Lidl Planning Policy Context...4 The Development Plan...4 Other Material Considerations Evaluation of Compliance with NPPF Retail Policy...9 Sequential Approach to Site Selection...9 Impact on Existing, Committed and Planned Public and Private Investment in Town Centres Within the Catchment Area...13 Impact on Town Centre Vitality and Viability, Including Local Consumer Choice and trade in the Town Centre and Wider Area...13 Study Area...14 Price Base and Design Year...14 Population...14 Qualitative Need...16 Retail Impact Summary and Conclusions...23 Appendices 1. Statistical Tables 2. Plan of Study Area 3. Plan Detailing DTZ Healthcheck of Shoreham Town Centre Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea ii RPS Planning & Development

4 1 Introduction Purpose and Scope 1.1 This Retail Assessment has been prepared by RPS Planning and Development on behalf of Lidl (UK) GmbH to accompany a planning application for the redevelopment of a site at the Brighton Road in Shoreham-by-Sea. 1.2 The planning application proposes the demolition of the existing industrial buildings at Malthouse Estate and the development of a deep discount foodstore with dedicated surface level parking. It will be accessed via Brighton Road. Further details of the access arrangement and forecast traffic generation are provided in the supporting Transport Assessment. 1.3 This report focuses purely on the retail policy issues associated with the proposed development. It is intended to assist Adur District Council in its determination of the application and has been prepared in accordance with the requirements set out in National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). It seeks to evaluate the proposal against national and local retail planning policies and to consider the retail justification and the implications of the proposed development on established trading patterns and the vitality and viability of designated town centres. This report follows the defined methodology, wherever possible, set out in the Council s Specification for Retail Assessments in Adur (July 2012). Site Description 1.4 The application site lies within the Malthouse Industrial Estate situated between the main railway line and Brighton Road and is approximately 1km east of Shoreham Town Centre. Brighton Road is an established location for manufacturing, storage and trade counter uses, including neighbouring occupiers including Halfords, B&Q, McDonalds and Dunelm Mill. The site extends some 0.65ha and is occupied by two industrial units with associated car parking. The total gross floorspace of the two units combined is 3,177 sqm. Entrance to the site is via a single vehicular access via Brighton Road. 1.5 The Dolphin Industrial Estate lies to the north of the application site and beyond this is an existing residential development. The Proposed Development 1.6 The proposed development proposes the full demolition of Unit 1 and the partial demolition of Unit 2, and the erection of a Lidl foodstore of 1,781 sqm gross area and a sales area of 1,286 sqm. Dedicated surface level parking for 100 cars will be provided to the west of the building, including 6 disabled spaces and 3 parent and child bays. About Lidl Lidl s Trading Characteristics 1.7 The proposed foodstore will be occupied by Lidl, who as a Limited Assortment Discounter operate a different format to the mainstream retailers. Lidl s strategy is to serve local needs through the provision of smaller stores at convenient locations within or close to residential Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 1 RPS Planning & Development

5 areas, which are capable of serving both the local shopping needs of the immediate surrounding areas and the main food shopping needs of local residents. This operation is based upon a more traditional supermarket format with prices that are deeply discounted. 1.8 There are no deep discount food retailers in Shoreham-by-Sea, the nearest stores being in Portslade, Woking and Brighton. The primary catchment of such stores is generally within 5 minutes drive-time and in this respect the nearest existing discount store is 15 minutes drive away in Portslade. 1.9 The above demonstrates that there is clear qualitative deficiency in provision. The deep discount food retail sector is an established niche in the overall convenience goods sector. Currently, residents are denied access to a local facility, something that the application proposal will help to overcome The complementary nature of Lidl s retail offer is an important distinction that needs to be considered when determining the planning application, with particular regard to any perceived impact on the vitality or viability of existing centres. Large and small retailers alike continue to trade successfully alongside Lidl stores all over the UK Lidl stores receive a twice weekly delivery of special non-food offers such as a limited range of electrical, homewares and gardening products. These products are marketed in the press to attract customers into the store, and sold on a strictly limited basis. The products sold on this basis constantly change and therefore there is no potential for sustained impact on existing centres, unlike the typical comparison offer in superstores which are focused on clothing and CD/DVD sales Products are often displayed in their original pallets or boxes to minimise unnecessary costs associated with conventional shelf stacking. This no-frills approach is typical of the commitment to ensure that products are sold at the lowest possible margins. However this business model does have implications in terms of store design, with sales areas having to be on single level and free from columns. Sustainability 1.13 On the issue of waste, Lidl are committed to the recycling of their packaging material, with their merchandising and display formats being designed to facilitate this. All cardboard is compacted and stored on site for daily collection by the returning HGV, along with all plastic, food waste, wood and all non-recyclable refuse. In the UK during between April 2012 and March 2013 Lidl recycled some 44,000 tonnes of cardboard and paper, 22,000 tonnes of plastic and 1,000 tonnes of metal, 125 tonnes of electrical items and 100 tonnes of textiles. The volume of recycled material has increased year-on-year. 90% of Lidl s overall waste stream is recycled Principles of sustainability are engrained in Lidl s operation, from the efficient construction and standardised fit-out elements that enable rapid store construction, to energy saving measures including energy efficient building materials, low energy consumption lighting, motion detectors and automatic power down lighting, electricity and heating in the evenings. Employment 1.15 Up to 40 entirely new full and part time posts will be created in the store. Lidl always seek to source labour locally and provide management opportunities for staff, the company s Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 2 RPS Planning & Development

6 philosophy being to provide all their employees with opportunities for developing and progressing their careers with the company, with the corporate strategy being to promote from within. Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 3 RPS Planning & Development

7 2 Planning Policy Context 2.1 This section provides a review of the planning policy context at the national and local level that is considered relevant to the application. 2.2 Section 70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 states that in dealing with an application for planning permission the local planning authority shall have regard to the provisions of the development plan, with Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 then saying that the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The statutory development plan used to comprise Regional Planning Guidance, Structure and Local Plans (or within a unitary authority a Unitary Development Plan), however the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 reformed the plan making process within England, replacing the three-tiered system with a two-tier system of Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS s) and Local Development Frameworks (LDF s). 2.3 Legislation to abolish regional spatial strategies was included within the Localism Act 2011, and the Regional Strategy for the South East (Revocation) Order 2013 came into force on 28 th February The remaining elements of the statutory development plan covering the planning application site therefore comprise the saved policies of the Adur Local Plan that was adopted in April 1996, this sets out the policies and proposals for development and use of land in the Adur District up to Due to the age of the Local Plan, this was amended in September 2007 in accordance with the Planning Compulsory Act 2004 to save relevant policies to form part of the development plan. 2.4 Other material considerations include the Council s emerging Local Development Framework comprising the Adur Local Plan 2013, Adur District Council Retail Study Update (DTZ, June 2009) and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The Development Plan Adur adopted Local Plan (April 1996) 2.5 The Adur Local Plan (April 1996; amended September 2007) sets out policies and proposals for the development and use of land in the Adur District up to the year In accordance with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the Secretary of State issued a direction on 25th September 2007 indicating the policies that were saved and therefore remain part of the development plan, and those which were deleted. The retail policies of the Adur Local Plan noted below, unless otherwise stated, have been saved for development control purposes. 2.6 The site is identified on the Proposals Map that accompanies the saved policies of the Local Plan as an area of business, industry and warehousing. Policies AE2 and AE3 state that within these areas permission will granted for development (including the change of use of buildings) for business and industrial purposes falling within Use classes B1 and B2 and B Policy AS2 states that the LPA will not permit the development of large retail uses on sites outside the boundary of the built-up area, since it would prejudice the Plan s countryside protection policies. The application site is within the built-up area, however the Council have Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 4 RPS Planning & Development

8 noted that Policy AS2 is only partly consistent with the NPPF since it makes no reference to the sequential approach or impact assessment. Other Material Considerations Adur Local Plan Currently the Council are preparing the Adur Local Plan 2013, which will supersede the current Local Plan and be the main policy document against which planning applications will be determined. The Revised Draft Plan 2013 went to the planning Committee on 2 nd September 2013 for comments and then was presented to the Cabinet on 17 th September 2013 at which time approval was given to commence public consultation. That has now begun and will run until 7 th November Key issues for the Plan include: The need to facilitate the regeneration of Adur, including diversifying the economy; The need to improve infrastructure, much of which is outdated and inadequate to meet modern needs; The need to balance development and regeneration requirements against the limited physical capacity of Adur; The need to address deprivation, Adur being the most deprived district in West Sussex The key Vision for the area includes focussing most development around the main communities of, inter alia, Shoreham-by-Sea. While many residents will continue to visit Worthing, Brighton and other centres for employment and some retail and leisure functions, Adur will continue to have an important role in providing, inter alia, retail facilities (paragraph 1.40). New development at Shoreham harbour is expected to create new opportunities for employment, with a mix of residential, employment, community, education, leisure and retail development. Relocation of some existing commercial uses will result in a more attractive urban environment and an improved interface between the Harbour and the rest of Adur Revised Draft Policy 2 sets out the Plan s Spatial Strategy, which includes Shoreham Harbour being a focus for development to facilitate regenerations, which will be delivered through an Area Action Plan. Shoreham Airport is to be a focus for new employment floorspace. Development within the built-up areas will be permitted, subject to other policies in the Plan The application site falls within the western arm of the Shoreham Harbour Regeneration Area, where the plan is to maximise the potential of the Harbour for the benefit of existing and future residents, businesses, Port-users and visitors through a long term regeneration strategy. Previous studies undertaken by the South East England Development Agency and the Shoreham Port Authority have identified scope for significant housing development the now revoked Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East specifically identified Shoreham Harbour as a Growth Point. The emerging Local Plan s Revised Draft Policy 8 identifies the Harbour as a regeneration area where the Council will facilitate the delivery of 1,050 new dwellings up to 2031 and a further 550 beyond that. Housing is to be balanced with the provision of new employment generating uses including, inter alia, retail. Within the Western Harbour Arm Area Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 5 RPS Planning & Development

9 the priorities will include the comprehensive redevelopment of the waterfront area to become a sustainable mixed-use residential area In terms of Shoreham-by-Sea the draft Plan states that the town centre is relatively healthy and provides a different and complementary retail offer distinct from the larger shopping centres in Brighton and Worthing. It also acknowledges that physical constraints means there are limited opportunities in the core of the existing centre to accommodate significant additional retail floorspace. As a result of this it is suggested that any large scale convenience retail development should be located on the eastern side of the town centre to help reinforce the existing shopping centre and meet the demand from growth at Shoreham Harbour: the application site accords with this strategy Paragraph 3.16 notes that the Council s 2009 Retail Study Update identified capacity for an additional 2,100sq m of convenience floorspace and 13,200sq m of comparison within the Shoreham area Revised Draft Policy 25 seeks to protect and enhance existing employment sites, stating that conversion to other non-class B uses will be resisted at eight identified employment sites, none of which includes the Malthouse Estate on Brighton Road. For other non-specified sites, the preferred approach will be to resist conversion or redevelopment unless it can be satisfactorily demonstrated that the site is genuinely redundant and unlikely to be re-used for Class B uses within the Plan period Paragraph 4.69 identifies Shoreham, Lancing and Southwick as the three main centres, with an out-of-centre retail park at Holmbush Farm. Adur District Council Retail Study Update (DTZ, June 2009) 2.17 DTZ were commissioned by Adur District Council in 2009 to update their earlier 2006 retail study. The 2009 report included health checks for the town centres, including Shoreham, and updated the assessment of the quantitative need for new retail floorspace. In relation to the health of Shoreham town centre, the study concluded that the centre was relatively strong and viable at the beginning of While economic conditions may cause difficulties for a number of retailers, the nature of Shoreham s retail provision, which largely serves a local catchment area, was expected to allow the bulk of the retail offer and service offer to continue trading well In its quantitative capacity assessment for convenience floorspace, there is limited capacity identified for future convenience retail in Shoreham town centre. Having regard to retail commitments DTZ identified capacity for an additional 2,100sq m of convenience floorspace and 13,200sq m of comparison within the Shoreham area. Only 250 sq m net was within the town centre, with the majority being generated at Holmbush Farm. National Planning Policy Framework 2.19 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published on 28 th March 2012 and has replaced all previous central government Planning Policy Guidance Notes and Planning Policy Statements. Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 together make it a statutory requirement for planning applications to be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The NPPF must be taken into account in the Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 6 RPS Planning & Development

10 preparation of local and neighbourhood plans, and is also a material consideration in planning decisions The objectives of the new NPPF have been to simplify national planning policy and support and encourage sustainable economic development. Paragraph 14 makes clear that At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking. It is also made explicit that in making decisions on planning applications this means: approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless: o o any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in the Framework indicate development should be restricted Annex 1 of the NPPF addresses transitional arrangements and indicates that as of March 2013 the weight to be accorded to all existing development plan policies (those adopted pre-2004, as is the case with the Joint Replacement Structure Plan, and post-2004, as is the case with the Local Plan) will depend on their degree of consistency with the Framework Paragraph 17 of the new Framework sets out the core planning principles that should underpin both plan-making and decision taking. These state that planning should, inter alia: Proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs. Every effort should be made objectively to identify and then meet the housing, business and other development needs of an area, and respond positively to wider opportunities for growth.. Promote mixed use development, and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas Paragraphs state that the Government is committed to securing economic growth in order to create jobs and prosperity, and to ensuring that the planning system does everything it can to support sustainable economic growth. Planning is expected to encourage and not act as an impediment to sustainable growth, and significant weight should therefore be placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system. Paragraph 7 of the Framework advises that there are three dimensions to sustainable development: 1) An economic role the planning system should contribute to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation; and by identifying and co-ordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure; 2) A social role planning should support strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 7 RPS Planning & Development

11 generations; and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being; and 3) An environmental role the system should contribute to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment, including using natural resources prudently, minimising waste and pollution and mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy In relation to town centres and retailing, Section 2 of the Framework reiterates the previous guidance in PPS4 that LPAs should promote competitive town centres that provide customer choice and a diverse retail offer, and that they should pursue policies that support centres viability and vitality. Paragraph 23 states that it is important that needs for retail, leisure, office and other main town centre uses are met in full and are not compromised by limited site availability Paragraph 24 requires a sequential approach to selecting sites for main town centre uses (which include retail development, hotels, restaurants and bars) where they are not in an existing centre or in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan. As before, the first preference is for sites within town centres, followed by edge-of-centre locations and only then out-ofcentre sites at accessible locations. Sites must be suitable and available, and both developers and local planning authorities should demonstrate flexibility on issues such as format and scale Paragraph 26 states that for retail development outside a town centre and not in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan, an impact assessment will be required if the development is over a proportionate, locally set floorspace threshold: in the absence of a locally set threshold the default is 2,500sq m. The assessment should consider: The impact of the proposal on existing, committed and planned public and private sector investment in a centre or centres within the catchment area of the proposal; and The impact on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and trade in the centre and wider area The assessment of impact should be made up to five years ahead of when the application is submitted. For major schemes where the full impact will not be realised in five years the impact should also be assessed up to ten years from the date of the application. However it should be noted that neither the adopted Local Plan nor the emerging Core Strategy sets a local threshold for the assessment of retail impact, which means that the default threshold of 2,500sq m gross set out in the NPPF should therefore be applied: the total new retail floorspace proposed in the current application is only 1,781sq m gross, meaning an assessment of impact is not mandated Paragraph 27 makes clear that where an application fails to satisfy the sequential test, or is likely to have significant adverse impact on one or more of the above factors, it should be refused. Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 8 RPS Planning & Development

12 3 Evaluation of Compliance with NPPF Retail Policy 3.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has simplified the policy tests previously mandated for new out-of-centre retail development in PPS4. Section 2 of the Framework relates to retail development and the vitality of town centres, and requires the following assessments for developments proposed outside defined retail centres and not in accordance with an up to date development plan: Sequential test. Retail impact, comprising: o o Impact on existing, committed and planned public and private investment in centres within the catchment area. Impact on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and trade in the town centre and wider area. 3.2 Paragraph 27 of the NPPF is clear that where an application fails to satisfy the sequential test or is likely to have a significant adverse impact [our emphasis], it should be refused. Sequential Approach to Site Selection 3.3 First and foremost it should be remembered that the proposed development will facilitate the reuse of a brownfield site that will generate employment, and as such it accords with NPPF policy on making the effective use of land and securing economic growth. 3.4 Our sequential search has sought sites within or adjoining the define centres at Shoreham, Lancing and Southwick. We have failed to identify any potential sites at Lancing or Southwick but have examined five sites within Shoreham. We have assessed each one against the criteria of suitability, availability and viability. 3.5 In relation to suitability, any alternative site must be of a size that can accommodate the proposed development. There is a requirement for developers and retailers to be flexible in relation to format, scale and design, and the amount of car parking, however it is also recognised, and has been accepted at appeal, that flexibility has to be considered within the confines of the identified need and the retailer s business model. In this case Lidl s established business model and the trading format of bulky goods retailers must be a key consideration. Lidl s model requires a minimum size of store for trading operations to be viable; provision of dedicated surface level car parking and adequate service access. This has been confirmed at a number of planning appeals / call-in inquiries by Planning Inspectors and the Secretary of State, including decisions in 2006 in Oxford and the London Borough of Merton. In those decisions it was accepted that the minimum size of site for Lidl s business model was 0.45ha, with a minimum store sales area of around 1,063 sq m. However it should be noted that since then their business model has changed such that their standard format now requires slightly larger stores. Lidl stocks its stores with products displayed on the pallets on which they are delivered, and this is uneconomic in stores below 1000sq m net and/or where the layout is not open plan. 3.6 In considering whether a site is suitable under the sequential approach it has been established in case law that this means suitable for the development proposed by the Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 9 RPS Planning & Development

13 applicant, rather than suitable for meeting identified deficiencies in the area. This interpretation was made clear in the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Tesco Stores Limited (Appellants) v Dundee City Council (Respondents) (Scotland) [2012]. At paragraph 37 of this judgment, Lord Hope states It is the proposal for which the developer seeks permission that has to be considered when the question is asked whether no suitable site is available within or on the edge of the town centre. He added at paragraph 38 These [sequential test] criteria are designed for use in the real world in which developers wish to operate, not some artificial world in which they have no interest doing so. 3.7 The Dundee judgement says that the application of the sequential test ought to centre on the nature of the development proposed and not on a hypothetical scenario of disaggregated floorspace for which there is no identified interest. 3.8 In considering the question of the extent of the area that should be searched, the High Court Judgement in Regina v Braintree District Council Ex Parte Clacton Common Development Limited is also of note. In that case George Bartlett QC concluded that it was not necessary to look at potential alternative sites in every centre that fell within the catchment area of the proposed development. It had been contended that potential alternative sites in every centre within the proposed development catchment area should be considered, however, in reaching his judgement he stated that a site examined some distance from the application site would effectively have its own catchment area which may only include a part of the original catchment area of the application site. 3.9 In considering the issue of viability, it is a prerequisite that the retailer must be satisfied that they can operate from the site and that the cost of acquisition is such that the development is economically viable In terms of availability the site must be available within a reasonable time period The sequential assessment has considered current vacant units and potential opportunities within and adjacent to the defined centres and the following sites have been identified that are similar in size to the application site. It should be noted that these have all been assessed as part of a planning application for mixed development incorporating a convenience store on the former Parcelforce site on Brighton Road (application ref: AWDM/0501/12) and that the Council in approving that application accepted that none of the sequential sites were suitable and/or available to accommodate a foodstore development The identified sites comprise: St Mary s Church, 25 East Street, Shoreham-by-Sea; New Road, Shoreham-by-Sea; 84 High Street, Shroeham-by-Sea; Norfolk House, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea; and Ropetackle North, Riverbank Business Centre, Old Shoreham Road. Civic Centre, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea. 1. St Mary s Church Hall, 25 East Street, Shoreham-by-Sea 3.13 This site is situated on the corner of East Street and New Road in Shoreham-by-Sea and currently contains a Church Hall. A planning application proposed the part demolition of the Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 10 RPS Planning & Development

14 Hall and its replacement with a mixed use development comprising retail units at ground floor level with residential dwellings located above the new retail floorspace. The application was refused by the Council due to concerns over scale and design. Subsequently, this refusal was upheld at appeal in June 2010 (Ref: APP/Y3805/A/10/212127). The Inspector concluded that the benefits of the scheme did not outweigh the increase of pressure on infrastructure, having particular regard to transport, education, library facilities and fire/rescue service In terms of the site s availability, suitability and viability: Availability The site is identified as a key opportunity site within the Council s town centre masterplan (A Strategy for Shoreham Renaissance, March 2006). This masterplan suggests a mix of retail, offices and flats, so a solus foodtsore development would not be appropriate. It is currently occupied by a Church Hall and therefore the site is unlikely to become available within a reasonable time period. Suitability The site is too small to accommodate the proposed foodstore required. The Council s aspiration for a mixed use development at the site would not be met for a proposal for a single foodstore use. The site is therefore not considered suitable. Viability As evidence by the refusal of the planning application by the Council, and by an Inspector on appeal, the redevelopment of this site would need to overcome a number of locational issues, including the pressure of development on local infrastructure. Furthermore, a large foodstore development would not be compatible with the surrounding uses, including the Shoreham Conservation Area and an adjacent Grade 1 listed Church. It is therefore not a viable option. In conclusion, the site does not present an available, suitable or viable option for development. It can therefore be dismissed as a potential alternative site New Road, Shoreham-by-Sea 3.15 This site lies outside of the core shopping area and should therefore be considered edge-ofcentre in policy terms. It is currently occupied by a Hire Shop In terms of the site s availability, suitability and viability: Availability Planning permission (Ref: ADC/0005/10) was granted in May 2010 for the demolition of the derelict shop and the erection of a number of residential dwellings on site. The site is therefore part of a committed development and not available. Suitability The site is too small to accommodate the size of retail floorspace proposed by Lidl, and is therefore not suitable In conclusion, the site is not available, suitable or viable High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea 3.18 The site is located within the core shopping area. While the lower floors are currently vacant, the upper floors remain in office use In terms of the site s availability, suitability and viability: Availability The upper floors of the site remain in occupation for office use. It recently received planning permission for the change of use from offices to residential and health care Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 11 RPS Planning & Development

15 facilities in August 2011 (Ref: ADC/0112/11 and AWDM/0249/11). It is in active use and therefore not available. Suitability The site is too small to accommodate the size of floor space required by Lidl and is therefore not suitable. Planning permission has already been secured for redevelopment for an alternative use and re-locating existing users would be time consuming and costly In conclusion, the site is not available, suitable nor viable and can be dismissed as a sequentially preferable site. 4. Norfolk House, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea 3.21 This site is located within the shopping area and the land is currently occupied by a 1960 s office block, which fronts onto the waterside In terms of its availability and suitability: Availability In February 2011 a planning permission was granted for demolition of the existing office block and redevelopment of the site for a 72 bedroom hotel. A revised scheme for the site was subsequently submitted in October 2011 for nine three bedroom dwellings and office space. This application (Ref: AWDM/0871/11) was approved by the Council in April last year. Suitability The site is too small to support the size of store required by Lidl. Viability Whilst the site is located within the core shopping area, it is poorly connected to the rest of the core shopping area and set back from what is considered the prime retail frontage. This site is therefore not a viable option for a foodstore In conclusion, the site is not available, suitable nor viable. It can therefore be dismissed as a potential site. 5. Ropetackle North, Riverbank Business Centre, Old Shoreham Road 3.24 The site falls out-with the core shopping area and is therefore an edge-of-centre site. It is identified as a site for retail development under Policy DP.AS1, including a requirement for a new access road In terms of the site s availability, suitability and viability: Availability It is considered to be partly vacant and available since the majority of the site has been cleared. Suitability Any redevelopment of the site will require a co-ordinated and comprehensive development to include a new access road and the creation of stronger linkages with Shoreham s core shopping area. Viability Adur District Council indicated that a recent application for the site was refused on the grounds that it only fulfilled the residential element of the Council s aspiration to bring forward a mixed use development. It is therefore clear that the site requires a comprehensive masterplanned approach to development and that a solus foodstore development would not be acceptable. It is affected by a number of issues including flooding, which will need to be addressed and which will increase development costs. The resolution of land ownership will also be required in order to deliver development at the site. That will be time consuming and costly. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the site will not become available within a reasonable time period. Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 12 RPS Planning & Development

16 3.26 In conclusion, the site is not considered suitable or viable. It can therefore be dismissed as a potential alternative site. 6. Civic Centre, Ham Road 3.27 The Civic Centre occupies an edge-of-centre site that is bounded by Ham Road, Eastern Avenue and the A259 Brighton Road. It was marketed for development in 2011 with suggested uses including a foodstore with residential above In terms of its availability and suitability the Council previously selected Cantium Developments as their preferred developer to build a 5,574sq m (60,000sq ft) foodstore with a 300 space customer car park. However technical problems have meant that no planning application has ever been submitted. We understand that the main constraint is the line of the town s main foul water sewer, which traverses the site and has ruled out major retail development. A statement by the leader of the Council back in November 2012 said that the presence of the sewer meant a supermarket could not be built and that the Council were considering alternative uses and would be remarketing the site The sites lack of suitability for food retailing has also been acknowledged through the Council granting planning permission for a mixed use development on the former Parcelforce site further along Brighton Road. At the time that application was being determined the LPA s policy team flagged up the Civic Centre as a sequential alternative to the convenience store being proposed in the application. However the application was subsequently recommended for approval and the permission was issued on 7 th October In doing that officers and members accepted that the Civic Centre site is not suitable to accommodate a convenience store In conclusion, while this site may still be available for redevelopment, it is not suitable for large retail uses and therefore can be dismissed as an alternative to the application site. Impact on Existing, Committed and Planned Public and Private Investment in Town Centres Within the Catchment Area 3.31 In terms of the impact of the proposed Lidl store, this will fall primarily on the larger out-ofcentre foodstores, it being a widely accepted principle that like impacts with like. The anticipated trade draw from the defined centres will not be such as to cause any significant impacts. We are not aware of any planned foodstore development proposals or allocations within any of the centres that could be affected by the proposal. There is a committed development for a 1,012sq m net convenience store on the edge of Shoreham town centre, however it is clear from the Retail Statement submitted with that application that the proposed store is not intended to be a deep discounter. The proposed Lidl will therefore operate in a different retail sector and will not prejudice this commitment from coming forward. Impact on Town Centre Vitality and Viability, Including Local Consumer Choice and trade in the Town Centre and Wider Area 3.32 The expenditure capacity available to support additional retail floorspace within Shoreham-by- Sea and the likely effect of the proposed new stores on existing trading patterns, have been modelled and are detailed in the statistical tables enclosed at Appendix While it is no longer a mandatory requirement to demonstrate a quantitative need for new floorspace, it is still of relevance as the existence of expenditure leakage or over-trading in Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 13 RPS Planning & Development

17 existing stores can weigh on the issue of the impact of new floorspace. We therefore summarise in the tables included in our Appendix 1 details of the convenience goods expenditure capacity within Shoreham-by-Sea. We do not believe that a detailed analysis of comparison goods capacity is required given the small turnover the store will generate from non-food goods A Retail Capacity Study produced for the Council by DTZ forms part of the evidence base for the emerging Adur Local Plan We have utilised data from this retail study, specifically with regard to population and their household survey of existing shopping patterns. We have however revised their figures by utilising more up to date estimates of per capita expenditure and forecast growth in the efficiency of existing floorspsace. Study Area 3.35 The study area adopted for the DTZ retail study includes the entire district as well as the immediate surrounding areas. The extent of the study area was arrived at having regard to a previous study conducted by DTZ in It is based on postcode sector geography and is split into 10 separate zones: Zone 1 Shoreham-by-Sea s home zone. A plan showing the extent of the study area, extracted from the DTZ study, is enclosed as Appendix 2. Price Base and Design Year 3.36 All monetary figures are expressed in 2008 prices as per the DTZ Study, and we have assumed a base year of 2013 and a design year of Population 3.37 Our quantitative analysis is set out in the statistical tables enclosed at Appendix 1. Table 1 details the resident population within the study area and are figures taken from the DTZ Study. The figures for 2013 and 2018 were not modelled/included within the retail study and so they have been interpolated from DTZ s figures for 2011, 2016 and It can be seen that the total resident population currently amounts to 527,286, of which 52,923 is within Zone 1 (Shoreham-by-Sea). At the design year of 2018 the total population in the study area is forecast to have grown to 555,709 and the population of Shoreham-by-Sea to 54,857. Available Expenditure 3.39 Table 2A details the per capita spending on convenience goods within each of the zones in the study area. The baseline figures for 2011 are local estimates for each zone taken from Experian Micromarketer these are more up to date than the figures in the DTZ study; figures post-2011 have been calculated by applying the forecast growth in the spending on convenience goods provided by Experian in their latest Retail Planner Briefing Note 11 (October 2013). Table 2C then incorporates a deduction for special forms of trading ie nonstore spending such as mail order and the internet. This utilises the rates set out in the DTZ Specification of Retail Assessments document for Adur Council. Those rates are higher than the latest forecasts in Experian s Retail Planner Briefing Note 11 and have been utilised in order to maximise the robustness of our analysis. Adopting the lower Experian forecasts would increase the pool of available spending in each zone Tables 2B and 2D provide the same information but for comparison goods. Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 14 RPS Planning & Development

18 3.41 Table 3A then multiplies the per capita spend in each zone (from Table 2C) by the resident population (from Table 1) to show the total convenience goods expenditure generated within the study area: this totals 867.4m at 2013, 925.3m at 2018 and 977.7m by Within just Zone 1, the current available spend is 82.4m, which is forecast to increase slightly to 86.5m by 2018 and 90.6m by Table 3B shows the available spending on comparison goods, which in just Shoreham (Zone 1) totals 139.2m at 2013, rising to 161.5m in 2018 and 180.1m by Turnover of Existing Foodstores 3.43 Table 4A sets out the current main food shopping patterns across the study area. These are derived from the results of the household survey conducted as part of the DTZ retail study. It can be seen that in relation to Zone 1, Shoreham-by-Sea was assessed to be retaining 53% of local spending, 8.5% of which was within the town centre. Table 4B then provides similar information but for top-up food shopping Table 5A then applies the market shares for main food shopping (from Table 4A to the available expenditure in each zone at 2013 (from Table 3A) to show the actual main food turnover of existing centres derived from the study area in 2013: we have assumed that 70% of all convenience spending is on main food shopping and 30% on top-up. Table 5B then details the turnovers from top-up shopping (applying the market shares from table 4B). Table 5C then adds Tables 5A and 5B together to show the total convenience goods turnovers of existing stores at It can be seen that the total turnover of stores in Shoreham is 82.3m Tables 6A-6C show the same information but for 2018: we have assumed that market shares remain constant. The total turnover of stores in Shoreham is estimated to be 86.8m, which is an increase of 4.5m over current levels It should be noted that this 4.5m growth in spending over the next 5 years is in itself sufficient to support the turnover of the proposed Lidl store. Table 5C also shows that of the 82.4m of spending generated within Shoreham (Zone 1), 40.3m is being spent in stores outside Adur, some of which is likely to be in discount foodstores in Woking and Brighton Table 7 then details the benchmark convenience goods turnover of the existing stores within Adur, assuming company average trading levels. The floorspace has been derived from the DTZ Study, as has the notional sales density for small town centre shops. However the sales density for named retailers are RPS figures that have been interpolated from the latest Verdict 2013 company profiles. Turnovers at 2018 assume Experian s forecast growth in retail sales densities from their latest Information Brief 11. The total benchmark turnover of existing stores in Adur is currently 83.8m, of which 63.8m is within Shoreham, the majority being at the Holmbush Retail Park. Convenience Goods Capacity 3.48 Table 8 shows the expenditure available to support new floorspace within Shoreham-by-Sea assuming the level of retained expenditure remains constant. This amounts to 33.9m at our design year of The allowance for inflow into Shoreham is as per the DTZ Study and is equivalent to 10% of the study area derived turnover. The benchmark turnover of existing and committed stores assumes growth in floorspace efficiency as forecast by Experian in their Retail Planner Briefing Note 11. The assessment assumes a constant market share. It is Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 15 RPS Planning & Development

19 readily apparent that the notional expenditure capacity is far higher than the expected turnover of the proposed Lidl. Turnover of the Proposed Development 3.49 Table 9 details the expected turnover of the proposed Lidl store. Its net sales area will be 1286sq m and at Lidl s company average sales density (derived from Verdict 2013) that will generate a total turnover of 3.8m, of which 80% or 3.1m is expected to come from convenience goods and the remainder from comparison. Assuming Experian s forecast growth in retail sales densities the turnover of the store at the design year of 2018 will be 3m from convenience goods and 0.9m from comparison. Comparison Goods 3.50 The proposed Lidl will function as a foodstore and will comprise a convenience business, and the small proportion of the store s floorspace that will be given over to comparison goods will turnover only 0.8m at This compares to a forecast growth in comparison goods spending within the Shoreham-by-Sea home zone of 22.3m over the next 5 years, meaning the proposed store s non-food turnover can be accommodated by just over two months worth of expenditure growth. Qualitative Need 3.51 While a demonstration of the need for a proposed development is no longer required in the NPPF, it is still the case that qualitative need is still a material consideration Indicators of qualitative need can include: Deficiencies of gaps in existing provision Consumer choice and competition Overtrading, congestion and overcrowding of existing stores Location specific needs such as deprived areas and underserved markets, and The quality of existing provision The proposed development will address the first indicator a gap in the existing provision. The deep discount food retail sector has now firmly established itself in the UK, and is a widely accepted essential component of the food retail market. The absence of a deep discounter in Shoreham restricts the shopping choice of local residents, inhibits competition, and forces those who prefer the discount format to travel further afield Since there are no deep-discount food retailers currently trading within Shoreham-by-Sea, the nearest existing stores being the Lidl in Worthing or the Aldi in Portslade, residents therefore have to travel outside the area in order gain access to what is an increasingly popular retail format. The proposed Lidl store on the application site would therefore provide both quantitative and qualitative improvements in shopping provision within Adur while at the same time reducing the need to travel Lidl is classified by Verdict as falling within the deep or hard discounters sector of the convenience retail market, together with Aldi and Netto, which is distinct from the mainstream retailers. Deep discounters concentrate on selling a limited range of primarily own brand Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 16 RPS Planning & Development

20 goods at extremely competitive prices. The Competition Commission s market investigation into The Supply of Groceries in the UK (April 2008) identified Lidl, Aldi and Netto as being a category of retailer distinct from the mainstream Big 4 operators (although since then Netto have ceased operations within the UK). Classed as Limited Assortment Discounters (LADs) they are distinguished by carrying a limited range of products that are sold at very competitive prices Paragraph 4.80 of the Commission s report says that during their investigation a number of retailers suggested that Aldi, Lidl and Netto should be included in the same product market as large grocery retailers. However they concluded that the limited number of products carried by LADs stores means that these stores are not close substitutes for similarly sized stores operated by Co-op, M&S, Sainsburys, Somerfield and Tesco It must therefore be accepted that the proposed Lidl would occupy a particular niche in the retail market and provide an offer not currently available in Shoreham-by-Sea The benefits of deep discount operators, such as Lidl, in meeting qualitative needs have also been recognised in relation to a number of appeals and recovered applications, including the following three cases: Proposed Lidl at Caerphilly Road, Cardiff (March 1999) In granting permission the Inspector stated that there are no deep discounters in this area of Cardiff. I take the view that any diversion of trade between this proposal and the four major supermarkets is a matter of trade competition and not grounds for objection to this proposal which would add to the range of shopping facilities available.in the particular circumstances of North Cardiff I consider that the introduction of a deep discounter would satisfy a level of need to provide a greater range and choice of shopping facilities accessible to both car born shoppers and walk-in trade. Proposed Lidl at Rowan Road, Mitcham, London (May 2006) This involved a called-in application granted permission by the Secretary of State. In his report the Inspector noted that in terms of qualitative need PPS6 emphasises the need to increase choice and competition and provide for a range of local shopping facilities. There are currently no deep discount stores within the catchment area and the range of local convenience shopping provision is limited. The Lidl offer is materially different to that provided by the mainstream food retailers. The proposed store will therefore meet a qualitative need in that it would extend consumer choice and aid competition within the catchment area, and provide an accessible local shopping facility for households on lower incomes and in particular those who do not own a car and/or are elderly. The Secretary of State agreed with this conclusion. Proposed Lidl at Cowley, Oxford (May 2006) In granting permission for this store the Inspector noted that it seems on the evidence Lidl does offer many products at significantly cheaper prices, compared with mainstream supermarkets. He also noted that additionally Lidl, as a limited range discount store, occupies a relatively new form of food retailing according to the 2000 Competition Commission Report on Supermarkets. He concluded that It is therefore fair to say that as there is no limited range discount foodstore in Oxford, this represents a gap in retail provision in a qualitative sense. It follows that consumer choice in Oxford would benefit from the introduction of a limited range discount store. The fact that there is a reasonable choice of supermarkets in the SE Oxford area does not diminish this point. Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 17 RPS Planning & Development

21 3.59 We believe that the conclusions on qualitative need reached by each of the above Inspectors are equally relevant to the current application, in that the proposed store would provide a particular type of retail offer not currently present in Shoreham and which would therefore fill a gap in the current retail provision, increasing choice and competition for the town and the surrounding area and reducing the need to travel. This qualitative need is all the more acute given that in the current economic downturn the low prices provided by the deep-discounters have become increasingly popular, not only with those on lower incomes but also the more affluent middle-classes The provision of a discounter therefore helps to address the location specific need which will be particularly important for Shoreham-by-Sea residents on lower incomes, for whom access to cheaper high quality food will be welcome, and assist in the reduction of social exclusion In overall terms, the proposal will increase the quality of existing provision in the town; enhancing competition and choice for local residents. Retail Impact Town Centre Health Checks 3.62 As a baseline for assessing the potential impact of the proposed development health checks of the closest shopping centres should be conducted. In July 2012 DTZ produced a Retail Report for Adur s Town Centres, which forms part of the Council s evidence base for the emerging Local Plan Their report mainly focuses on the three main town centres: Shoreham-by-Sea; Lancing; and Southwick We summarise below DTZ s findings for each of the town centres. We believe that their conclusions remain valid inasmuch as we have perceived no major changes in any of the centres. Shoreham-by-Sea 3.64 Shoreham-by-Sea is the largest town centre in Adur, extending north-south along East Street /Brunswick Road and east-west along High Street. The centre as defined in the Local Plan comprises 192 units. The DTZ survey splits the centre into eight blocks of frontages: a plan detailing these is appended as Appendix 3. The report summarises the health of each block as follows: 3.65 Block 1 comprises two frontages either side of Buckingham Road, to the north of the railway line. Half of these premises are occupied by services, and 42.9% are non-a3 service (including three hot food takeaways, one hairdresser and one estate agent). There is an even split of units occupied by comparison goods retail and convenience goods retail (14.3% each), including One Stop convenience store. Inspections recorded no vacant units within this block Block 2 on the east side of Brunswick Road consists of a broad mix of main town centre uses, extending southwards from the railway line to Tarmount Lane. This block includes the town centre s main supermarket (Co-Op) at the Gateway Shopping Precinct off Ham Road. Almost half (46.6%) of the units are occupied by services, and 40% are non-a3 services. There are Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 18 RPS Planning & Development

22 also a high proportion of retailers (23.3% comparison goods and 13.3% convenience goods) within Block 2. Inspections recorded no vacant units within this block Block 3 comprises frontages on the west side of Brunswick Road, extending southwards from the railway line to St Marys Road. Over half (51.8%) of these premises are occupied by services, including the Post Office and six financial and professional services (such as banks, estate agents and betting shops). There are no A3 services, whilst around a quarter (25.9%) of the units are occupied by comparison goods retailers. Block 3 also includes four offices (14.8%) and one vacant unit (3.7%) Block 4 is between St Marys Road (to the north) and Brighton Road (to the south) on the east side on East Street. It broadly comprises an even split of retailers and services (42.3% each), including a number of independent retailers (i.e. antiques, florists, grocers) and services (i.e. bakers, delicatessens, restaurants). Some 7.7% of the units within this block are vacant, the highest proportion within the town centre Block 5 comprises frontages on the west side of East Street (excluding The Church of St Mary de Haura) and on the north side of High Street (between Church Street and East Street). Our analysis shows that this block is dominated by comparison goods retailers (66.7%) including WHSmith, three charity shops, two electrical stores and one jeweller. Almost a quarter (23.8%) of the units are occupied by services, none of which are A3 uses. The block contains one vacant unit (4.7%) Block 6 between Ship Street and Church Street on the north side of High Street comprises an even split of units occupied by comparison goods retail and convenience goods retail (18.5% each). The frontage includes a number of key attractors including a Co-Op supermarket, Boots chemist and The Original Factory Shop variety store. It also comprises a high proportion of non-a3 services (37%) but no A3 uses. Our site inspections recorded two vacant units within this block (7.4%). This block includes some of the largest retail premises in the town centre, and several multiple retailers and service businesses Block 7 comprises frontages on the north side of High Street, between Ship Street and the Old Shoreham Road / Victoria Road junction. Reflective of the secondary shopping nature of this block, the majority of units (66.7%) are occupied by services, and 16.7% are A3 services (i.e. cafes, restaurants). None of the units within this block are occupied by convenience goods retailers. Analysis also shows that 20.8% of the premises are occupied by comparison goods retailers, the majority of which are independent retailers. Block 7 comprises one vacant unit (4.1%). The premises in this block are significantly smaller than most of those in Block Block 8 comprises frontages to the south of High Street. Over two-thirds (69.6%) of these premises are occupied by services, including 52.2% non-a3 and 17.4% A3. The block also contains 21.7% of units occupied by comparison goods retailers; these are attributed to independent retailers of children s toys, clothing, gifts and sports goods. Analysis shows that Block 8 includes one vacant unit (4.3%) Overall for a town centre of its size, Shoreham-by-Sea appears to be generally a healthy, centre meeting the local needs of existing residents. Lancing 3.74 Lancing town centre extends along North Road and South Street. As defined in the Local Plan it comprises 153 units. The DTZ report splits it into six blocks of frontages (detailed on the plan enclosed at Appendix 3). Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 19 RPS Planning & Development

23 3.75 Block 1 comprises frontages on the west side of North Road, north of the railway as far as the police station. Residential uses and places of worship dominate the frontage north of the police station to Crabtree Lane and have therefore been excluded from the proposed town centre boundary, and from the frontage analysis. Almost half (47.6%) of the units are occupied by retail uses, and 40.5% are attributed to comparison goods retailers. This block contains the town centre s main retail anchors (including Boots, Co-Op and WHSmith), complemented by a range of non-a3 services (28.6%). Site inspections recorded no A3 services but three vacant units (7.1%) Block 2 is on the east side of North Road, to the north of the railway line as far as the Queensway Shopping Precinct. Residential uses dominate the frontage north of Queensway Shopping Precinct to Crabtree Lane and have therefore been excluded from the proposed town centre boundary, and from the frontage analysis. A quarter of the premises are occupied by retailing, including 16.6% comparison goods and 8.3% convenience goods. Almost half (45.8%) of the units are occupied by non-a3 services, most of which are A2 financial and professional services such as banks, estate agents and betting shops. The block also comprises Freshbrook School, the Post Office and three vacant units (12.5%) at the Queensway Shopping Precinct Block 3 comprises an area to the south of the railway line, encompassing the Asda supermarket and frontages to the east and west of South Street (as far south as the South Street / Grinstead Lane junction). The town s main supermarket (Asda) is set back from the shopping frontage, which is dominated by service uses (57.6% non-a3 and 6.1% A3) including three estate agents, three hairdressers and two cafes. There are three vacant units (9%) within this block Block 4 comprises frontages on the east and west sides of South Street, from south of the South Street / Grinstead Lane junction as far as the kink in the road and the break in shopping frontages. Over a third (35.3%) of the units are occupied by comparison goods retailers, some of which are independent bulky goods retailers (i.e. carpets and flooring, ironmongery). There are no convenience goods retailers or A3 services within this block. Around a third (35.3%) of the units are attributed to miscellaneous uses such as Lancing Community Centre and places of worship. Our site inspections recorded one vacant unit (5.9%). This block is outside the area identified as the village heart in the Lancing Vision report Block 5 extends along the west side of South Street between the kink in the road and the break in shopping frontages (to the north), and Brighton Road (to the south). As well as comprising a number of residential uses which cause substantial breaks in the shopping frontage, this frontage has a high proportion of retail uses (41.6%), including 33.3% comparison goods and 8.3% convenience goods. However, these are all small shops occupied by independent retailers, some of which are specialists. Block 5 has the highest proportion of A3 services within the town centre (16.6%), which perhaps benefit from the proximity of the beach and associated visitor attractions. A quarter of the units are also occupied by non-a3 services, namely takeaways and sandwich bars. Our site inspections recorded one vacant unit within this block (8.3%) Block 6 extends along the east side of South Street between the kink in the road and the break in shopping frontages (to the north), and Brighton Road (to the south). This block contains the highest proportion of vacant units within the town centre (16%), whilst 52% of the premises are occupied by services; particularly non-a3 services (48%). In addition, around a Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 20 RPS Planning & Development

24 third (32%) of the units are occupied by a range of comparison goods (i.e. charity shops, carpets and flooring) and convenience goods (i.e. Premier convenience store, confectionary) retailers Overall Lancing is a vital and vibrant centre and offering a wide range of retail uses for existing residents. Southwick 3.82 Southwick is a small local centre located to the east of Shoreham-by-Sea, composed of 44 retail units. It caters for the daily shopping needs of local residents including banks, dry cleaners, hairdressers etc. National multiples located within the centre include Co-op and WHSmith. The majority of the units are occupied by services (45.4%) and only 6.8% are A1 shops In terms of convenience goods it is evident from DTZ s survey that the centre has a significantly higher than average representation (13.6% v 8.73%). In terms of quality of the retail offer, as already noted there is a Co-op as well as other smaller local shops. This is considered normal for a smaller centre focussed on meeting day-today needs In terms of comparison goods provision the centre is below the national average (29.5% v 41.22%) The vacancy rate of the report was found to be particularly low, substantially below the national average (2.3% v 12.58%). Such a low proportion of vacant units, especially during an economic downturn, suggests a comparatively healthy centre Overall Southwick seems to be a generally healthy centre, albeit it only serves small scale topup shopping needs of the surrounding area. Convenience Goods Impact 3.87 Table 10 sets out the estimated trade draw pattern to the proposed foodstore for convenience goods, and the consequent impact on existing stores within Adur. The first two columns in the table are figures for the turnover of existing stores at 2013 and 2018, derived from Tables 5C and 6C. The third and fourth columns detail the trade diversion to the proposed store, expressed as a percentage of the store s total convenience turnover and in monetary terms. The fifth column then gives the resulting post-impact turnover at 2018 (ie column two minus column four). The sixth column is the amount of trade diverted from each store expressed as a percentage of its pre-impact 2018 turnover It can be seen that the largest single trade draw (55% or 1.7m) is expected to be from the Tesco at Holmbush Farm: that is as a result of it s proximity to the Lidl and the fact that it is the dominant store in terms of main food shopping. The impact on the store will be only -2.8% Another 15% ( 0.45m) is expected to come from stores outside Adur, which will include existing deep discount stores in Worthing, Portslade and Brighton A further 16% or 0.48m will be taken from Shoreham Town Centre, the largest share, 10% or 0.3m, being from the Co-op on Ham Road. 3% ( 0.09m) will be taken from the Co-op on the High Street; 2% ( 0.05m) from the other small town centre shops and a nominal 1% ( 0.03m) from traders in the market. All the individual impacts are modest, with the overall impact on the centre being only -2.8%. The highest individual impact is -5.6% on the High Street Co-op, but Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 21 RPS Planning & Development

25 that is still well below the level at which the viability of the store is likely to be affected; postimpact the store will continue to trade at around it s benchmark company average level % or 0.15m is expected to be taken from both the M&S foodhall at Holmbush Farm and the Co-op in Southwick Square, with the remaining 4% ( 0.14m) being split equally between the Asda and Co-op stores in Lancing. All impacts are de minimis, with the highest being only - 3.1% on the Co-op at Southwick Square, which will continue to trade above its benchmark level In summary, the levels of trade diversion will be modest with all the resulting impacts being minor and not such as to result in any significant adverse impact. Comparison Goods Impact 3.93 The proposed store will comprise a convenience business, and the small proportion of the store s floorspace that will be given over to comparison goods will turnover only 0.9m (at 2018) In terms of impact, the comparison offer in most deep discount stores is constantly changing, with weekly when it s gone it s gone promotions: the range of goods provided to the stores varies from week to week depending on what products the buyers can source. Examples of promotions can include gardening, equestrian, vehicle maintenance etc. The significance of this variety of offer is that there is no potential for sustained impact on town centre or local shops in the way that there is where a mainstream supermarket is concerned, whose offer typically includes clothing, CD/DVDs, books, toys etc. For this reason estimating trade diversion patterns for the comparison element is all but impossible. However what can be said is that the modest amount of turnover the store will generate is equivalent to, and will be accommodated by only two and a half months worth of the projected growth in comparison goods expenditure within Shoreham over the next five years. Accordingly there is no reason to suppose that the store s non-food turnover will undermine any existing store. Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 22 RPS Planning & Development

26 4 Summary and Conclusions 4.1 The retail assessment has been prepared by RPS Planning and Development on behalf of Lidl (UK) GmbH, to accompany a planning application for a new deep discount foodstore on part of the existing Malthouse Industrial Estate in Shoreham-by-Sea. The foodstore will have a gross floor area of 1,781 sqm and a sales area of 1,286 sq m net sales. Customer parking will be provided for 100 cars. With regard to the retail policy elements of the proposal the pertinent facts are as follows: The application site is brownfield land and its reuse will therefore conform to national and local planning policies encouraging sustainable development. The proposed store will address the gap in the provision of local food shopping facilities in Shoreham-by-Sea, where there are currently no deep discount foodstores. The proposal complies with the sequential approach to site selection, since no other location has been identified within or adjoining a defined centre that are available, suitable and viable to accommodate the proposed development. The capacity assessment shows that there is sufficient expenditure being captured by Shoreham-by-Sea to support the proposed development. The foodstore s turnover will be modest in comparison with the mainstream operators and the levels of impact will be small. There is considered to be no potential for the proposed store to materially harm any existing town centre or prejudice future investment in any of the defined centres. National planning policy seeks to encourage sustainable economic development and provide new employment opportunities. The proposed development will meet these policy objectives, providing up to 40 new full and part time jobs within the new store. The vast majority of positions will be made available to local people, which will be an important boost to those seeking work in Shoreham-by-Sea following an unprecedented global economic downturn. 4.2 Having regard to the above conclusions, it can be seen that the proposed development would conform to both national and local planning policies. The development satisfies the sequential test; it is located at an accessible location; it involves a substantial investment in Shoreham-by- Sea that will address the need for a new deep discount foodstore; it will create new jobs; and it will not result in any significant adverse impact and consequently planning permission should be granted. Brighton Road, Shoreham-by-sea 23 RPS Planning & Development

27 Appendix 1

28 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham By Sea Table 1: Resident Population Within Study Area Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone TOTAL Notes: Population figures are derived from DTZ The Retail Capacity forcasting Model June Figures for 2013 and 2018 have been interpolated from DTZ's figures for 2011, 2016 and JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

29 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham Table 2A: Per Capita Spending - Convenience Goods (inc SFT) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Notes: 2011 baseline figures are derived from Experian Micromarketer, converted to 2008 prices. Growth rate for has been derived from Experian 'Retail Planner Briefing Note 10.1' September 2012 (Table 1a). Post-2013 growth rates are derived from Experian 'Retail Planner Briefing Note 11' October 2013 (Table 1a). Table 2B: Per Capita Spending - Comparison Goods (inc SFT) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Notes: 2011 baseline figures are derived from Experian Micromarketer, converted to 2008 prices. Growth rate for has been derived from Experian 'Retail Planner Briefing Note 10.1' September 2012 (Table 1a). Post-2013 growth rates are derived from Experian 'Retail Planner Briefing Note 11' October 2013 (Table 1a). JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

30 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham Table 2C: Per Capita Spending - Convenience Goods (exc SFT) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Notes: Deductions for SFT (non-store spending) have been taken from DTZ's Specification for Retail Assessments in Adur' (July 2012): %; %; %; %; %; %; %; %. Table 2D: Per Capita Spending - Comparison Goods (exc SFT) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Notes: Deductions for SFT (non-store spending) have been taken from DTZ's 'Specification for Retail Assessments in Adur' (July 2012): %; %; %; %; %; %; %; %. JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

31 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham Table 3A: Total Available Expenditure - Convenience Goods ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone TOTAL Notes: Derived by multiplying population (from Table 1) with per capita spend (from Table 2C) Expressed in 2008 prices. Table 3B: Total Available Expenditure - Comparison Goods ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone Zone TOTAL Notes: Derived by multiplying population (from Table 1) with per capita spend (from Table 2D) Expressed in 2008 prices. JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

32 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham Table 4A: Main Food Existing Shopping Patterns Market Share by Zone (%) Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Tesco Extra, Hombush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Sainsbury's Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea Shoreham-by-Sea market Other Foodstores, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Shoreham Subtotal Asda, South Street, Lancing Town Centre (formerly Co-op) Co-op, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre Lancing Subtotal Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre Southwick Square Subtotal Total Adur Outside Adur Total TOTAL Notes: Derived from the Adur District Council (Shoreham-by-Sea) Household Survey March Main Results Q6. Table 4B:Top-Up Food Existing Shopping Patterns Market Share by Zone (%) Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Tesco Extra, Hombush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Somerfield, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Sainsbury's Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea Shoreham-by-Sea market Other Foodstores, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Shoreham Subtotal Asda, South Street, Lancing Town Centre Somerfield, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre Lancing Subtotal Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre Southwick Square Subtotal Total Adur Outside Adur Total TOTAL Notes: Derived from the Adur District Council (Shoreham-by-Sea) Household Survey March Main Results Q9. JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

33 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham By Sea Table 5A: Existing 'Main Food' Turnovers 2013 Main Food Turnover by Zone Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Total Turnover ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) Available Main Food Expenditure Tesco Extra, Hombush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Somerfiled, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Sainsbury's Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea Shoreham-by-Sea market Other Foodstores, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Shoreham Subtotal Co-op, South Street, Lancing Town Centre Somerfield, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre Lancing Subtotal Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre Southwick Square Subtotal Total Adur Outside Adur Total TOTAL Notes: Derived by applying market shares in table 4B to the available expenditure in each zone in 2013 (from Table 3A). Expressed in 2008 prices. Table 5B: Existing Top-Up Turnovers 2013 Top Up Turnover By Zone Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Total Turnover ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( m) Available Top Up Expenditure Tesco Extra, Hombush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Somerfield, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Sainsbury's Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea Shoreham-by-Sea market Other Foodstores, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Shoreham Subtotal Asda, South Street, Lancing Town Centre Somerfield, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre Lancing Subtotal Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre Southwick Square Subtotal Total Adur Outside Adur Total TOTAL Notes: Derived by applying market shares in table 4B to the available expenditure in each zone in 2013 (from Table 3A). Expressed in 2008 prices. Table 5C: Total Turnover of Existing Convenience Stores 2013 Total Convenience Goods Turnover By Zone Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Total Turnover ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( m) Available Expenditure Tesco Extra, Hombush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Sainsbury's Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea Shoreham-by-Sea market Other Foodstores, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Shoreham Subtotal Asda, South Street, Lancing Town Centre (formerly Co-op) Co-op, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre Lancing Subtotal Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre Southwick Square Subtotal Total Adur Outside Adur Total TOTAL Notes: Derived by adding Table 5A and Table 5C Expressed in 2008 prices. JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

34 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham Table 6A: Existing 'Main Food' Turnovers 2018 Main Food Turnover by Zone Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Total ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) Available Main Food Expenditure Tesco Extra, Hombush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Somerfiled, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Sainsbury's Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea Shoreham-by-Sea market Other Foodstores, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Shoreham Subtotal Asda, South Street, Lancing Town Centre Somerfield, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre Lancing Subtotal Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre Southwick Square Subtotal Total Adur Outside Adur Total TOTAL Notes: Derived by applying market shares in table 4A to the available expenditure in each zone in 2018 (from Table 3A). Expressed in 2008 prices. Table 6B: Existing Top-Up Turnovers 2018 Top Up Turnovers by Zone Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Total ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) ( m) Available Expenditure Tesco Extra, Hombush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Somerfield, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Sainsbury's Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea Shoreham-by-Sea market Other Foodstores, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Shoreham Subtotal Asda, South Street, Lancing Town Centre Somerfield, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre Lancing Subtotal Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre Southwick Square Subtotal Total Adur Outside Adur Total TOTAL Notes: Derived by applying market shares in table 4B to the available expenditure in each zone in 2018 (from Table 3A). Expressed in 2008 prices. Table 6C: Total Turnover of Existing Convenience Stores 2018 Total Convenience Turnover Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Total ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( M) ( m) Available Expenditure Tesco Extra, Hombush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Sainsbury's Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea Shoreham-by-Sea market Other Foodstores, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Shoreham Subtotal Asda, South Street, Lancing Town Centre (formerly Co-op) Co-op, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre Lancing Subtotal Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre Southwick Square Subtotal Total Adur Outside Adur Total TOTAL Notes: Derived by adding Table 5A and Table 5C Expressed in 2008 prices. JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

35 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham Table 7: Benchmark Turnover of Existing Convenience Floorspace in Adur Net Sales Area Convenience Sales Area Convenience Sales Area Convenience Sales Density 2013 Convenience Turnover 2013 Convenience Turnover 2018 (sq m) (%) (sq m) ( /sq m) ( m) ( m) Tesco Extra, Holmbush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea % Co-op, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre % Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre % Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre % Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea % Other shops, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre % Shoreham Subtotal Asda, South Street, Lancing Town Centre (formerly Co-op) % Co-op, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre % Other shops Lancing Town Centre % Lancing Subtotal Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre % Other Southwick Square Town Centre % Southwick Square Subtotal TOTAL ADUR Notes: Floorspace derived from DTZ retail study. Sales densities for named stores are company averages derived from Verdict Figures for small town centre shops are taken from DTZ retail study. Expressed in 2008 prices. JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

36 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham Table 8: Shoreham-by-Sea Convenience Goods Expenditure Capacity Available convenience goods expenditure ( m) Shoreham-by-sea turnover from study area ( m) Market Share (%) Expenditure inflow ( m) Total turnover potential ( m) Benchmark Turnover of existing stores ( m) and committed stores ( m) Shoreham Residual expenditure capacity ( m) Notes: Available expenditure within study area is derived from table 3A Turnover of stores in Shoreham-by-Sea derived from study area in 2013 is taken from Table 5A Inflow from outside the study are assumed to amount to 10% of study area dervied turnover Benchmark turnover for 2013 of existing and committed floorpsace taken from Table 7 and grown using Experian Retail Planner 11 Table 4a (October 2013) JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

37 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham Table 9: Turnover of the Proposed Development Gross Floor Area (sq m) 1781 Net Sales (sq m) 1286 Benchmark sales density ( /sq m) 2989 Total Turnover ( m) 3.84 Convenience goods 2013 (%) 80 ( m) 3.1 Comparison goods 2013 (%) 20 ( m) 0.8 Convenience goods 2018 ( m) 3.0 Comparison goods 2018 ( m) 0.9 Notes: Benchmark sales density is Lidl company average derived from Verdict Turnover at design year of 2018 assumes Experian's forecast growth in sales densities, from Figures 4a & 4b in 'Retail Planner Briefing Note 11' Expressed in 2008 prices. JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

38 Lidl UK GmbH Proposed Retail Development at The Brighton Road, Shoreham Table 10: Retail Impact - Convenience Goods Turnover 2013 Turnover 2018 Trade Draw to Proposed Lidl Resultant Turnover Impact ( m) ( m) (%) ( m) ( m) (%) Shoreham-by-Sea Co-op, High Street, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Shoreham-by-Sea market Co-op, Ham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Other shops, Shoreham-by-Sea Town Centre Sub-total Shoreham Town Centre Tesco Extra, Hombush Farm, Upper Shoreham Road, Shoreham-by-Sea Marks and Spencer, Holmbush Centre Co-op, Royal George Parade, Shoreham-by-Sea Shoreham Sub-total Lancing Asda, South Street, Lancing Town Centre Co-op, Queens Parade, North Road, Lancing Town Centre Lancing Sub-total Southwick Square Co-op, Southwick Square, Southwick Town Centre Southwick Square Sub-total Stores Outside Adur TOTAL Notes: Pre-impact turnovers at 2013 and 2018 are derived from Tables 5C & 6C. JPW0201/ Shoreham Tables v1 November 2013

39 Appendix 2

40 Zone 5 Zone 7 Zone 6 Zone 8 Zone 3 Zone 9 Zone 1 Zone 10 Zone 2 Zone 4 Adur District: Zones /03/ Tele Atlas NV 's. This product includes mapping data licensed from Ordnance Survey with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Crown Copyright All rights reserved. Licence Number Minton Place, Victoria Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1EG Tel: Web: