Lancaster District Local Centres Study Lancaster City Council - July 2017
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Lancaster District Local Centres Study Lancaster City Council July 2017
Contents
1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 2
2.0 Planning Policy Context ......................................................................................... 6
3.0 Local Centre Healthchecks .................................................................................... 16
4.0 Distribution and Provision of Facilities Within Local Centres...................................... 35
5.0 Assessment of Proposed Local Centres ................................................................... 38
6.0 Walk Time Catchments ......................................................................................... 64
7.0 Summary and Recommendations........................................................................... 73
Glossary of Terms......................................................................................................... 80
Appendices
Appendix 1 – Study Area Zones
Appendix 2 – Distribution of Retail Hierarchy
Appendix 3 – Distribution of Convenience Goods Retailers
Appendix 4 – Local Centre Health Checks
Appendix 5 – Overview of Walk Time Catchments
Appendix 6 – Individual Walk Time Catchment Plans
Appendix 7 – Social Demographic Statistics
Appendix 8 – Updated Capacity Model
Appendix 9 – WYG Defined ‘Urban Areas’
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
1
1.0 Introduction
Objectives of the Study
1.01 WYG Planning (hereafter referred to as ‘WYG’) was commissioned by Lancaster City Council
(‘the Council’) to undertake a review of the defined local centres within Lancaster and provide
strategic planning advice regarding the proposed new local centres within the strategic policy
allocations of Bailrigg Garden Village, East Lancaster and North Lancaster.
1.02 Local centres are currently defined through the Lancaster Core Strategy, under Policy ER 4.
There are currently nine designated local centres within the Core Strategy. Paragraph 5.27 of
the Core Strategy describes these as offering basic local shops including a Post Office, a
general store, a chemist and other specialist shops. As the Core Strategy states, these centres
remain important in providing sustainable shopping facilities for local communities and that
their continued vitality is important. We cover the relevant policies in more detail in Section
2.0 below.
1.03 Once adopted, Policy TC1 of the emerging Strategic Policies & Land Allocations Development
Plan Document (DPD) will redefine the existing retail hierarchy for the Lancaster District.
Policy TC1 proposes 16 local centres, split across urban and rural parts of the district and
defined by their proximity to both Lancaster and Morecambe. Many of the local centres
defined under Policy ER 4 of the core strategy remain under Policy TC1.
1.04 Many local centres provide access to shops but are also the ‘heart’ of the local community in
some instances, with community halls and libraries. Due to the substantially different
demographics of the populations surrounding the currently defined local centres, each centre
is qualitatively different and have been structured and designed to meet specific needs. There
are notably different offers in each centre, matching the specific requirements of residents in
each of the catchments.
1.05 Shopping and leisure provision within Lancaster is largely concentrated within the centres of
Lancaster and Morecambe and to a lesser extent, Carnforth. These retail centres are
characterised by a range of local and national retailers that predominately serve the local
area.
1.06 Outside of these centres, additional retail facilities are offered within the smaller local centres.
Lancaster has a network of local centres, which act as a focus for local life and successful
communities. They provide shops, services and facilities to meet local day to day needs as
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
2
well as providing opportunities for growth, investment and local employment close to where
people live and in some cases, work.
1.07 The Council is committed to maintaining the vitality and viability of appropriate local centres
for the benefit of those who live, work and visit Lancaster and Morecambe. Local centres
should be the focus for retail development and community uses to meet the requirements of
the local community. By ensuring an appropriate balance of uses is supported, the role of
Local Centres will be maintained and strengthened.
1.08 The facilities contained within local centres provide an important resource to the community
they serve. In many cases, they provide a heart to a community and are situated close to
residential accommodation thereby ensuring all residents, regardless of access to a car, can
access facilities locally. They reduce the need to travel for everyday items and are important
providers for those members of the community that are less mobile.
1.09 However, it should be noted that shopping patterns have changed significantly over the years
with people forgoing daily food shopping in favour of the weekly ‘big’ shop at major
supermarkets. The supermarkets themselves reacted by growing bigger and by extending the
range of goods they sell to compete not just with local butchers, bakers, newsagents etc, but
also against service traders such as Post Offices, banks, pharmacies and opticians. Recent
trends appear to show that the move towards more and larger superstores may be over with
a marked shift towards more local convenience shopping (i.e. C-Stores and Metro formats).
1.10 This is not turning back time to retailing patterns of old, with old local centres automatically
enjoying a renaissance, rather there are demands for the convenience of big store shopping in
more local locations. This is leading to pressure for new ‘large local’ convenience stores with
dedicated or ample local parking such as more modern Co-Operative stores or Tesco Express
and Sainsbury’s Local. With people often now driving to local stores, sometimes as part of
linked trips instead of walking, centres not located on main roads or offering adequate parking
are often put at a significant disadvantage.
1.11 There is also marked growth in the discounters’ segment of the food market with companies
such as Aldi and Lidl expanding rapidly. Whilst these companies operate stores larger than can
comfortably be accommodated in local centres they often choose to locate in suburban
locations presenting challenges to established centres.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
3
1.12 Considering the above, WYG has been commissioned to assess the existing local centres as
defined in the emerging local plan and establish their current ‘health’. This has then enabled a
review of whether there are any key deficiencies in provision and where the Council needs to
be focussing on potentially defining new local centres to serve populations not currently in
easy access to local retail and service provision. In addition to the existing local centres, as
part of our site visits we have also assessed other areas which contain an accumulation of
main town centre uses and have a future potential as new designated centres.
The Brief
1.13 A summary of the brief as provided by Lancaster Council is provided below.
▪ Assess all existing local centres as identified in the emerging local plan, and prepare a
health check for each of the centres providing an overview of the vitality and viability of
each centre;
▪ Assess all proposed local centres in South Lancaster (Bailrigg Garden Village), East
Lancaster and North Lancaster and provide recommendations on the proposed scale
and role of the proposed centres;
▪ Provide an overview of centre provision across the district, considering both existing and
proposed centres, and reflect on whether there are any deficiencies and whether there
is sufficient provision to meet the needs and demands of the significant housing and
economic growth which is proposed in the draft plan;
▪ Provide an overview of the proposed retail growth in the draft plan, considering both
the quantitative and qualitative issues which surround the comparison retail growth
proposed at Lancaster Canal Corridor and the former Frontierland site. A similar
approach should be taken towards the delivery of proposed convenience retailing
growth to the South of Lancaster; and
▪ Provide a recommendation over the future needs for a local impact threshold to be
provided as part of the emerging local plan (rather than the current default position of
the national threshold).
Structure of Report
1.14 Our report is structured as follows:
▪ Section 2.0 - Planning Policy Context
▪ Section 3.0 – Local Centre Healthchecks
▪ Section 4.0 – Distribution and Provision of Facilities in Local Centres
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
4
▪ Section 5.0 – Assessment of Proposed Local Centres
▪ Section 6.0 – Analysis of Walk Time Catchments
▪ Section 7.0 - Summary and Recommendations
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
5
2.0 Planning Policy Context
National Planning Policy Framework
2.01 The National Planning Policy Framework was published in March 2012. The NPPF replaced all
former Planning Policy Statements, Planning Policy Guidance Notes and some Circulars in a
single consolidated document.
2.02 The main theme of the NPPF is that there should be ‘a presumption in favour of sustainable
development’. In terms of plan-making, it is stated that local planning authorities should
positively seek opportunities to meet the development needs of their area, with an emphasis
on Local Plans having sufficient flexibility to adapt to rapid change.
2.03 In terms of economic development, it is set out within the NPPF’s core principles that planning
should proactively drive and support economic development to deliver the homes, business
and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs. Every
effort should be made to objectively identify and then meet the business and other
development needs of an area, with positive responses made to wider opportunities for
growth.
2.04 The NPPF stresses the Government’s commitment to securing economic growth to create jobs
and prosperity, with paragraph 17 stating that the planning system should do everything it
can to support sustainable economic growth.
2.05 Paragraph 19 indicates that planning should operate to encourage and not to act as an
impediment to sustainable growth, and that significant weight should be placed on the need
to support economic growth through the planning system. The NPPF seeks to ensure that
local planning authorities plan proactively to meet the development needs of business and
support an economy fit for the 21st century.
2.06 The NPPF still recognises the need to promote the vitality and viability of towns and cities
through the promotion of competition and growth management during the plan period.
Paragraph 23 of the NPPF provides guidance for local planning authorities in drawing up Local
Plans, it indicates that they should:
▪ recognise town centres as the heart of their communities and pursue policies to support
their vitality and viability;
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
6
▪ define a network and hierarchy of centres that is resilient to anticipated future economic
changes;
▪ define the extent of town centres and primary shopping areas, based on a clear definition
of primary and secondary frontages in designated centres, and set policies that make clear
which uses will be permitted in such locations;
▪ promote competitive town centres that provide customer choice and a diverse retail offer
and which reflect the individuality of town centres;
▪ retain and enhance existing markets and, where appropriate, re-introduce or create new
ones, ensuring that markets remain attractive and competitive;
▪ allocate a range of suitable sites to meet the scale and type of retail, leisure, commercial,
office, tourism, cultural, community and residential development needed in town centre. 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. Local planning authorities
should therefore undertake an assessment of the need to expand town centres to ensure
a sufficient supply of suitable sites;
▪ allocate appropriate edge of centre sites for main town centre uses that are well
connected to the town centre where suitable and viable town centre sites are not
available. If sufficient edge of centre sites cannot be identified, set policies for meeting
the identified needs in other accessible locations that are well connected to the town
centre;
▪ set policies for the consideration of proposals for main town centre uses which cannot be
accommodated in or adjacent to town centres;
▪ recognise that residential development can play an important role in ensuring the vitality
of centres and set out policies to encourage residential development on appropriate sites;
and
▪ where town centres are in decline, local planning authorities should plan positively for
their future to encourage economic activity.
2.07 Paragraph 23 also indicates that needs for retail, leisure, office and other main town centre
uses should be met in full and should not be compromised by limited site availability.
2.08 Paragraph 24 requires local planning authorities to adopt a sequential approach to the
consideration of planning applications for main town centre uses that are not in an existing
centre or in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan. The following paragraph 25 indicates
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
7that that the sequential approach should not apply to applications for small scale rural offices
or other small scale development.
2.09 Paragraph 26 indicates that local planning authorities should require an impact assessment for
retail, leisure and office development outside of town centres which are not in accordance
with an up-to-date Local Plan and if the development is over a proportionate, locally set
threshold. Where there is no locally defined threshold, the default threshold will be 2,500
sq.m.
2.10 Paragraph 27 indicates that where an application fails to satisfy the sequential test or is likely
to have a significant adverse impact on the vitality and viability of a town centre or on
existing, planned, committed investment in a centre it should be refused.
2.11 The NPPF also recognises that retail activity should still, where possible, be focused in existing
town centres. Retail and leisure proposals which cannot be accommodated in or adjacent to
the town centre must satisfy a dual impact test and the sequential test.
Ensuring the Vitality of Town Centres Planning Practice Guidance
2.12 ‘Ensuring the Vitality of Town Centres’ National Planning Practice Guidance was published in
March 2014. It provides a concise summation of how retail and main town centre planning
policy is to be applied in practice. The objectives of the Practice Guidance remain comparable
with those of its predecessor, with there being a stated requirement for local planning
authorities to plan positively and support town centres to generate local employment, promote
competition within and between town centres, and create attractive and diverse places for
users.
2.13 The Practice Guidance requires local planning authorities to fully assess and plan to meet
needs for main town centre uses through the adoption of a ‘town centre first’ approach.
Paragraphs 002 and 003 confirm that this should be delivered through a positive vision or
strategy which is communicated through the development plan. The strategy should be
facilitated through active engagement with the private sector and other interested
organisations (including Portas Pilot organisations, Town Teams and so on). Any strategy
should be based on evidence which clarifies the current state of town centres and
opportunities to meet development needs and support centres’ vitality and viability.
2.14 Such strategies should seek to address the following matters:
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
8▪ the appropriate and realistic role, function and hierarchy of town centres in the area of
over the plan period, including an audit of the vitality and viability of existing town centres
and their ability to accommodate new development;
▪ consideration of the vision for the future of each town centre and the most appropriate
mix of uses;
▪ the assessment of the scale of development that a town centre can accommodate;
▪ the timeframe for new retail floorspace to be delivered;
▪ what other complementary strategies are necessary or appropriate to enhance the town
centre to deliver the vision in the future; and
▪ the consideration of the enhancement of car parking provision including charging and
enforcement mechanisms.
2.15 Paragraph 005 of the Practice Guidance identifies a series of key indicators which are of
relevance in assessing the health of a centre over time. Paragraph 005 goes on to state that
not all successful town centre regeneration initiatives have been retail led or focused on
substantial new development, but have instead involved improvements such as renewed
public realm, parking, and accessibility and other partnership mechanisms.
2.16 Paragraph 009 reaffirms the town centre first policy in the form of the sequential test, which
requires local planning authorities to undertake an assessment of candidate sites’ availability,
suitability and viability when preparing their local plan. Such an assessment should also
consider the scale of future needs and the type of land required to accommodate main town
centre uses.
Housing and Economic Development Needs Assessment Planning
Practice Guidance
2.17 The Government has issued further Practice Guidance to provide specific instruction in respect
of the undertaking of needs assessments (including those for main town centre uses).
Paragraph 032 of the Housing and Economic Development Needs Assessments Planning
Practice Guidance states that plan makers should consider forecasts of quantitative and
qualitative need based on a range of data which is current and robust. Local planning
authorities will need to take account of business cycles and make use of forecasts and surveys
to assess employment land requirements.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
9Relaxation of Permitted Development Rights
2.18 At a national level, recent changes to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted
Development) Order 1995 have sought to support the diversification and vitality of town
centres. The changes follow the Portas Report recommendation to make it easier to change
surplus space to provide for the effective re-use of buildings.
2.19 The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015
came into force on 15 April 2015. The Order acts, inter alia, to consolidate and replace the
Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order 1995) and to provide
additional permitted development rights. It should be noted that conditions and restrictions
apply, and that prior approval is generally required to implement development. The new
rights include:
▪ a permitted change of use from retail/financial services (Class A1/A2), betting offices and
pay day loans shops to residential (Class C3);
▪ a permitted change of use from amusement arcade/casino (sui generis use) to residential
use (Class C3);
▪ a permitted change from retail (Class A1) to financial services (Class A2);
▪ a permitted change from retail/financial services (Class A1/A2) to food and drink (Class
A3);
▪ a permitted change from retail/financial services (Class A1/A2), betting offices, pay day
loan shops and casinos to assembly and leisure uses (Class D2);
▪ an extension of the temporary permitted development rights introduced in May 2013 for
extensions to shops, offices, industrial and warehouse buildings to support business
expansion and the economy so they apply permanently;
▪ the erection of click and collect facilities within the cartilage of a retail shop; and
▪ modifications to the size of an existing retail shop loading bay.
2.20 The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) (Amendment)
Order 2016 subsequently came into force on 6 April 2016. The Amendment provides for the
change of use of launderettes to residential uses as permitted development, and acts to make
permanent previous temporary provisions which permit the change of use from office to
residential use. A condition allowing the local planning authority to consider noise impacts on
the intended occupants of the development from premises in commercial use is included in
the extended right.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
102.21 The intended consequence of the above measure is to secure the redevelopment and reuse of
premises. It is considered that the relaxation in respect of changes of use to residential are
more likely to encourage re-use of offices in larger metropolitan areas which may benefit from
a greater supply of office buildings.
Lancaster Council Development Plan Policy
2.22 The adopted development plan for Lancaster City comprises:
▪ Lancaster District Local Plan (adopted April 2004);
▪ Lancaster Core Strategy (adopted July 2008);
▪ Lancaster Development Management DPD (adopted December 2014); and
▪ Morecambe Area Action Plan (adopted December 2014).
Lancaster District Local Plan
2.23 Although Chapter 3 of the Local Plan relates to the local economy and the preamble to this
chapter states that it is the aim of the Council to continue the successful development of
tourism and leisure in the District, most policies relating to leisure development have been
superseded by the policies contained within the Core Strategy, Development Management
DPD and Morecambe AAP.
Lancaster Core Strategy
2.24 The Core Strategy, which was adopted in 2008, sets out a spatial vision for the District up to
2021. The Strategy identifies suitable areas for development and regeneration, as well as
those areas which should be conserved. The Core Strategy sets out broad locations for land
use, with site specific areas for development or protection to be identified in the Land
Allocations Development Plan Document.
2.25 The Core Strategy sets out a vision for the District to be a sustainable self-contained and
varied group of communities comprising:
▪ Morecambe and Heysham – A confident community with a regenerated living, working
and leisure environment;
▪ Lancaster – A prosperous historic city with a thriving knowledge economy;
▪ Carnforth – A successful market town and service centre for North Lancashire and South
Cumbria; and
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
11▪ A conserved, enhanced and diversified coast and countryside with a network of vibrant
rural communities.
2.26 Policy ER 4 seeks to maintain the vitality and viability of the town centres in the District. The
policy seeks to improve the roles of Lancaster, Morecambe and Carnforth as tourist and visitor
destinations.
Development Management DPD
2.27 The Development Management DPD sets out policies to be used in the determination of
planning applications. It is the Council’s intention that once a Land Allocations DPD has been
adopted, this documents, alongside the Development Management DPD and Morecambe AAP,
will replace the Core Strategy, which will be withdrawn as a material planning consideration.
2.28 Policy DM1: Town Centre Development seeks to direct proposals for main town centre uses to
defined town centres. The policy states that any proposals relating to leisure facilities and
hotel development will be expected to adhere to the requirements of the sequential test. An
interim town centre designation plan for Lancaster city centre is set out at Appendix G of the
Development Management DPD for use in the application of this policy.
2.29 Policy DM2 of the Development Management DPD relates to retail frontages. The document
sets out retail frontages for Lancaster and Carnforth, with the retail frontages for Morecambe
to be addressed by the Morecambe AAP. The policy states that proposals with primary retail
frontages which involve the change of use of ground floor premises to non-A1 uses will only
be permitted where three criteria are met. These criteria seek to maintain the vitality and
viability of Lancaster and Carnforth by maintaining a concentration of retail uses and activity
within the primary retail frontage. The policy states that within the secondary retail frontages,
the Council will seek to retain an appropriate mix of ‘A’ Class uses whilst permitting a limited
number of non-A1 uses. However, for proposals for a change of use of ground floor premises
to non-A1 uses to be permitted, several criteria will need to be met.
2.30 The council has recently consulted on a revised draft Development Management DPD (27 th
January – 24th March 2017). In the emerging document, Policy DM1 becomes DM14 and Policy
DM2 becomes Policy DM15. The policies themselves however remain unchanged.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
12Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD 2017
2.31 The Strategic Policies & Land Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) will direct where
homes, employment land, services and future investment will go in the district between 2011-
2031. During 2015, the Council consulted on a series of strategic options for growth to inform
the preparation of the Land Allocations DPD.
2.32 In January 2017, the Council published the Consultation Draft of the document which was
consulted on for eight weeks. Once adopted, the Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD
and accompanying Policies Map will replace all site-specific guidance contained within the
Strike-Through Edition of the Lancaster District Local Plan 1996 – 2016 (which was adopted in
2004 and reviewed in 2008).
2.33 The document proposes a new Retail hierarchy for Lancaster District which is set out under
Policy TC1 and replaces that defined by Policy ER 4 of the Core Strategy. The proposed retail
hierarchy remains largely unchanged to the existing hierarchy, with the introduction of further
Local Centres. The emerging hierarchy is as follows:
▪ Sub-Regional Centre – Lancaster (TC1.1)
▪ District & Regeneration Priority Area – Morecambe (TC1.2)
▪ District & Key Service Centre – Carnforth (TC1.3)
▪ Urban Local Centres (Morecambe)
- Bare (TC1.4)
- Torrisholme (TC1.5)
- Westgate (TC1.6)
- West End (TC1.7)
▪ Urban Local Centres (Lancaster)
- Bowerham (TC1.8)
- Scotforth (TC1.9)
- Lancaster Uni (TC1.10)
- Ridge (TC1.11)
- Skerton (TC1.12)
▪ Urban Local Centres (Heysham)
- Heysham Road (TC1.13)
- Heysham Village (TC1.14)
▪ Rural Local Centres
- Caton (TC1.15)
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
13- Hornby (TC1.16)
- Galgate (TC1.17)
- Bolton-le-Sands (TC1.18)
- Silverdale (TC1.19)
2.34 The local centres proposed at Scotforth, Ridge and Skerton do not yet exist and represent the
proposed creation of new local centres as part of strategic growth plans for South, North and
East Lancaster. We provide further an assessment of the nature of these proposed centres
below.
Forthcoming Projects and Schemes
2.35 We set out below details of forthcoming project and schemes in the Lancaster local authority
area which have the potential to encourage growth in the commercial retail and leisure sector
in the District and particularly within the city centre.
Lancaster Canal Corridor North Scheme
2.36 The Canal Corridor North Scheme is a key regeneration priority, as set out in the Core
Strategy. The Canal Corridor North relates to an area of land between St Leonard’s Gate, Moor
Lane and the Lancaster Canal. The Canal Corridor North site has a long history, with previous
plans for the delivery of large scale retail-led regeneration scheme being delivered on the site.
However, because of a range of factors including the refusal of an initial application in 2009
(application ref. 09/00002/CALLIN - largely on built heritage grounds), the economic recession
and changes to the retail environment, there has been slow progress in relation to the plans
for the regeneration of the site. However, in January 2016, the Council made the decision to
continue to work with developers British Land in relation to the development of the city centre
site.
2.37 We are aware that plans are currently being developed with the aim of delivering an
alternative scheme on the site. Given the current retail climate, it is anticipated that leisure
uses including food and beverage uses will form a substantial element of the revised scheme.
It is aimed that by providing an improved leisure offer within the city centre, additional visitors
will be attracted to the centre because of the strong overall offer. Such leisure users,
combined with the city’s retail offer, could assist in improving dwell times in the city, thus
improving the overall vitality and viability. Whilst no scheme has yet been finalised or an
amended application submitted, we understand that the revised scheme will seek a different
scheme to that which has been previously progressed, seeking increased number of
residential properties and complementary uses for university students.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
14Morecambe Bay Retail Park (Former Frontierland)
2.38 Lancaster City Council has granted planning permission for the redevelopment of the former
Frontierland site on Marine Road, Morecambe (Application: 14/00388/FUL). The proposal is
predominantly for comparison goods retailing but also includes a significant proportion of food
and beverage (the creation of 1,432sqm of A3 / A4 uses).
2.39 There remains an expectation that development on this site will commence through 2017 /
2018 and, whilst the final operators for this floorspace are yet to be announced, it is expected
that the development of this site will raise the standard of commercial leisure in Central
Morecambe, both directly through the redevelopment of the Frontierland site but also the
indirect impacts on commercial leisure premises on the promenade (most notably the cinema
and bowling offer).
2.40 Opus Land North (the applicant) has subsequently applied in 2016 to vary conditions attached
to the 2014 permission, to amend the approved plans and to widen the permitted use across
the site (application ref. 16/00159/VCN). It is envisaged that the applicant is keen to attract a
high quality retail and leisure offer and we understand discussions with specific operators are
ongoing. However, work on Bay Retail Park (named by the applicant) has yet to commence,
and it is unclear when precisely the development will be implemented.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
153.0 Local Centre Healthchecks
Introduction
WYG undertook a site visit to each of the 13 existing local centres as set out within the draft
Policy TC1 within the emerging Strategic Policies & Land Allocations Development Plan
Document (DPD). The site visits also involved a more general site search for other potential
new local centres in areas which may be deficient of a defined centre or overall retail and
service offer. A plan showing the existing distribution of the centres as designated by policy
TC1 is shown in figure 3.1 below and the full plan is provided at Appendix 2.
Figure 3.1: Existing Distribution of Defined Centres in Lancaster
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
16Draft Policy TC1 provides the proposed retail hierarchy for the Lancaster District, including the
city centre, Morecambe town centre, Carnforth district centre and a range of urban local
centres (in Morecambe, Lancaster and Heysham) and the rural local centres. The draft policy
defines the local centres as:
▪ Urban local centres – these centres will maintain their roles in providing key services to
the residents of Morecambe, Lancaster and Heysham; and
▪ Rural local centres – these centres will maintain their roles in providing key services to
the rural communities within the district.
The on-street review of the local centres ensured that up-to-date fascia and floorspace data of
the units at ground floor level could be collected and analysed. Reviews of the city and district
centres were undertaken by WYG on behalf of the Council separately in 2014.
The baseline information enabled WYG to assess the composition of each centre, by
categorising it against the Goad classification and class use (namely convenience, comparison,
financial and business service, retail service and leisure service) system. A record was also
taken of the vacant units in each centre. A full analysis of the centres is provided in Appendix
4, including the diversity of use plans showing the split of uses in each of the centres.
In addition to obtaining the diversity of use of the units within the centres, the site visits also
enabled WYG to undertake a ‘mini’ qualitative health check assessment of each of the centres
and parades, using several of the indicators outlined in the former Planning Policy Statement
(PPS) 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth (2009), now identified within the National
Planning Practice Guidance (‘NPPG’).
The NPPF does not provide a list of indicators to be used to assess the health of a centre,
however the NPPG (Ensuring the vitality of town centres) sets out several key indicators which
should be monitored on a regular basis to judge the health of a centre and its performance
over time. Due to the limited size of most the centres/parades, it should be noted that several
of the indicators could not be reviewed as there is no information available. The indicators
considered for this assessment were as follows:
▪ diversity of uses;
▪ proportion of vacant street level property;
▪ commercial yields on non-domestic property;
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
17▪ customers’ views and behaviour;
▪ retailer representation and intentions to change representation;
▪ commercial rents;
▪ pedestrian flows;
▪ accessibility;
▪ perception of safety and occurrence of crime; and
▪ state of local centre environmental quality.
The commentary below provides an overview of the analysis of the health of the local centres,
drawing on the information gathered from the sites visits and supplemented by desk-based
research.
The commentary is based on the more detailed appraisal of the relevant available information
for the 13 local centres, alongside a site plan, which is provided in Appendix 4. We have also
included an assessment of the vitality and viability indicators of Halton, which as we discuss in
more detail below, is a centre which the Council and WYG consider could suitably meet the
policy requirements and provide the necessary facilities and amenities of a local centre.
It is on the above basis that WYG has undertaken the review and provided our conclusions in
respect of the ‘health’ and overall performance of each of the centres.
Health Check Indicator – Diversity of Main Town Centre Uses
Table 3.1 shows the total number of outlets and amount of floorspace within each of the 13
established centres, with the data obtained from the WYG site visits undertaken in February
2017. It is evident that Bare, Torrisholme, West End and Heysham Road are the key retail and
service locations in the area, with higher numbers of units and floorspace than the other
locations. West End is the largest local centre by some margin, with over double the number
of units of Bare, the next largest local centre.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
18Table 3.1: Summary of the Local Centres
Total Amount of Gross
Centre Total No. of Outlets
Floorspace (Sq.m)
Bare 29 2,108
Torrisholme 20 2,031
Westgate 11 3,187
West End 126 12,439
Bowerham 15 1,770
Lancaster University 13 3,327
Heysham Road 19 2,425
Heysham Village 5 326
Caton 5 905
Hornby 4 981
Galgate 1 186
Bolton-le-Sands 10 769
Silverdale 8 861
Total 264 31,315
Tables 3.2-3.6 provide the proportion of the number of outlets, as well as the proportion of
floorspace (gross) based on the Goad sub-categories within each of the centres surveyed. This
is presented as both the number and the percentages. The floorspace figures are derived from
the master map base map provided by the Council and provide indicative gross figures for the
size of each unit. It should however be noted that this is not reflective of the net sales area.
Table 3.2: Diversity of Use by Units (No. Units)
Local Centre Provision (No. Units)
Centre
No. Units Convenience Comparison Service Leisure Financial Vacant
Bare 29 5 12 5 5 2 0
Torrisholme 20 2 6 4 7 1 0
Westgate 11 4 1 2 4 0 0
West End 126 14 32 12 20 2 46
Bowerham 15 3 2 5 3 1 1
Lancaster University 13 2 2 4 3 2 0
Heysham Road 19 4 1 4 7 1 2
Heysham Village 5 0 1 1 3 0 0
Caton 5 1 1 2 1 0 0
Hornby 4 1 0 1 2 0 0
Galgate 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Bolton-le-Sands 8 2 2 2 2 0 0
Silverdale 8 2 1 2 2 1 0
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
19Table 3.3 Diversity of Use by Units (Percentage)
Local Centre Provision (%)
Centre
No. Units Convenience Comparison Service Leisure Financial Vacant
Bare 29 17.2% 41.4% 17.2% 17.2% 6.9% 0.0%
Torrisholme 20 10.0% 30.0% 20.0% 35.0% 5.0% 0.0%
Westgate 11 36.4% 9.1% 18.2% 36.4% 0.0% 0.0%
West End 126 11.1% 25.4% 9.5% 15.9% 1.6% 36.5%
Bowerham 15 20.0% 13.3% 33.3% 20.0% 6.7% 6.7%
Lancaster University 13 15.4% 15.4% 30.8% 23.1% 15.4% 0.0%
Heysham Road 19 21.1% 5.3% 21.1% 36.8% 5.3% 10.5%
Heysham Village 5 0.0% 20.0% 20.0% 60.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Caton 5 20.0% 20.0% 40.0% 20.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Hornby 4 25.0% 0.0% 25.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Galgate 1 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Bolton-le-Sands 8 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Silverdale 8 25.0% 12.5% 25.0% 25.0% 12.5% 0.0%
Lancaster Average 25.1% 16.7% 21.9% 28.0% 4.1% 4.1%
National Average 8.7% 31.6% 14.2% 23.6% 10.5% 11.2%
Table 3.4: Diversity of Use by Floorspace (Amount sq.m)
Local Centre Provision (amount of sq.m)
Centre Floorspace Convenienc Compariso
(Sq.m) Service Leisure Financial Vacant
e n
Bare 2,108 312 754 288 628 126 0
Torrisholme 2,031 588 460 245 638 100 0
Westgate 3,187 2,372 74 139 602 0 0
West End 12,439 1,297 2,670 692 2,917 106 4,757
Bowerham 1,770 379 218 367 508 110 188
Lancaster
3,327 690 290 954 921 472 0
University
Heysham Road 2,425 682 84 330 944 79 306
Heysham Village 326 0 88 45 193 0 0
Caton 905 282 36 128 459 0 0
Hornby 981 95 0 84 802 0 0
Galgate 186 186 0 0 0 0 0
Bolton-le-Sands 769 194 164 108 303 0 0
Silverdale 861 243 52 157 318 91 0
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
20Table 3.5: Diversity of Use by Floorspace (Percentage)
Local Centre Provision (%)
Centre Floorspace
(Sq.m) Convenience Comparison Service Leisure Financial Vacant
Bare 2,108 14.8% 35.8% 13.7% 29.8% 6.0% 0.0%
Torrisholme 2,031 29.0% 22.6% 12.1% 31.4% 4.9% 0.0%
Westgate 3,187 74.4% 2.3% 4.4% 18.9% 0.0% 0.0%
West End 12,439 10.4% 21.5% 5.6% 23.5% 0.9% 38.2%
Bowerham 1,770 21.4% 12.3% 20.7% 28.7% 6.2% 10.6%
Lancaster University 3,327 20.7% 8.7% 28.7% 27.7% 14.2% 0.0%
Heysham Road 2,425 28.1 3.5 13.6 38.9 3.3% 12.6%
Heysham Village 326 0.0% 27.0% 13.8% 59.2% 0.0% 0.0%
Caton 905 31.2% 4.0% 14.1% 50.7% 0.0% 0.0%
Hornby 981 9.7% 0.0% 8.6% 81.8% 0.0% 0.0%
Galgate 186 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Bolton-le-Sands 769 25.2% 21.3% 14.0% 39.4% 0.0% 0.0%
Silverdale 861 28.2% 6.0% 18.2% 36.9% 10.6% 0.0%
Lancaster Average 29.1% 12.7% 13.1% 36.5% 3.6% 4.9%
National Average 15.2% 35.5% 6.8% 24.7% 7.9% 9.3%
West End contains the highest number of convenience units (14), although these units are all
small format (less than 100 sq.m gross) and only account for 11.1% of the total floorspace,
significantly lower than the national average of 15.2%.
The largest convenience goods unit across the local centres is Lidl, located in the Westgate
local centre, comprising a floorspace of 1,549 sq.m (gross). Given the low proportion of units
present in many of the centres, the number of convenience goods outlets is greater than the
national average for all the centres, excluding Heysham Village which does not accommodate
a convenience goods offer. The average convenience goods offer for Lancaster District is
25.1% for the number of units and 29.1% for the provision of floorspace, on both accounts
greater than the respective national averages of 8.7% and 15.2%.
The provision of comparison goods units is consistently low across the local centres, excluding
Bare where the provision exceeds the national average figures in terms of both the number of
comparison goods units and proportion of floorspace. Whilst the other centres are
underrepresented, for local centres, a strong comparison goods offer is not required to
achieve their required function of meeting the basic day to day needs of residents. There are
two national multiple comparison goods retailers across the thirteen centres which are WH
Smiths located at Lancaster University and Boots the Chemist in Caton.
Unsurprisingly, given their role and local function, there are a good proportion of retail service
units in the centres in comparison to the national average, with Bowerham accommodating a
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
21high level of retail service operators. Torrisholme, Westgate and Heysham Village all have a
good provision of leisure service units in comparison to the national average, whilst Bare and
West End have a shortfall of this type of use. The financial and business services sector is
poorly represented, with several of the centres not accommodating any of this type of use,
with limited provision present elsewhere.
It is worth noting that the rural local centres (Caton, Horby, Galgate, Bolton-le-Sands and
Silverdale) all accommodate less than ten units and therefore limited weight should be
attributed to the national average comparisons at these locations. The facilities at these
locations serve significantly smaller catchments than the urban local centres but nevertheless
play a key role in serving the day to day needs of residents of the rural communities within
the district.
Health Check Indicator – Vacant Street-Level Property
The proportion of vacant street-level property identified across the local centres was found on
the most part to be low, with ten of the thirteen existing centres having no vacant outlets.
Consequently, the average vacancy levels for the local centres in Lancaster District are
significantly lower than the national averages in terms of both the number of vacant units and
the proportion of floorspace as outlined in table 3.6.
Table 3.6: Vacant Units
Total Amount of
Total No. of Vacant % of
Centre % of Outlets
Vacant Outlets Floorspace Floorspace
(Sq.m)
Bare 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Torrisholme 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Westgate 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
West End 46 36.5% 4,757 38.2%
Bowerham 1 6.7% 188 10.6%
Lancaster University 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Heysham Road 2 10.5% 306 12.6%
Heysham Village 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Caton 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Hornby 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Galgate 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Bolton-le-Sands 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Silverdale 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Lancaster Local Centre Average 4 4.1% 404 4.9%
UK Average* - 11.2% - 9.3%
West End local centre, which comprises a significantly greater proportion of retail and service
outlets than any of the other local centres in Lancaster District has a substantial level of
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
22vacancies. Within West End, 46 of 126 of the surveyed units were found to be vacant. The
area, which has been subject to long term vacancy issues is identified as a priority area for
regeneration and has the effect of skewing the averages somewhat. The statistics in relation
to vacancies show that, excluding West End, the proposed Local Centres are generally viable
and subject to low vacancy levels and as such, are trading relatively well.
Average Centre Composition
Following the health check appraisals, we have compiled the average number of units and
average proportion of floorspace in each of the surveyed centres to provide the average local
centre composition within the district. We have calculated the averages for the urban and rural
local centres separately as it has been established that the urban local centres serve for
significantly greater catchments than the rural local centres and consequently are generally
greater in scale in terms of the number of units and the proportion of floorspace. Table 3.7
shows the average composition of the urban and rural local centres in the district. Whilst
reviewing the averages across the centres is a useful tool for establishing the composition of
centres across the district, the figures should be viewed with some caution due to the
qualitative different nature of each of the centres, as we set out in some detail above and
below. There may be some centres which skew the figures considerably due to a larger than
average convenience store for example, or a higher than average vacancy rate due to other
social and economic matters.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
23Table 3.7: Average Centre Composition
Average Centre Composition (Urban Local Centres)
No. Units % Floorspace %
Convenience 4 14.3% 186 26.2%
Comparison 7 23.9% 81 11.5%
Retail Service 5 15.5% 83 11.7%
Leisure Service 7 21.8% 141 19.9%
Financial and Business Service 1 3.8% 110 15.6%
Vacant 6 20.6% 107 15.1%
Total 30 100% 709 100%
Average Centre Composition (Rural Local Centres)
No. Units % Floorspace %
Convenience 1 26.9% 143 22.5%
Comparison 1 15.4% 63 9.9%
Retail Service 1 26.9% 68 10.8%
Leisure Service 1 26.9% 269 42.4%
Financial and Business Service 0 3.8% 91 14.4%
Vacant 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 5 100% 634 100%
Table 3.7 shows that there is a significant difference in composition between the urban and
rural local centres, the average urban local centre accommodating 30 units, whilst rural local
centres accommodate 5 units. This is no surprise given the larger catchments supported by
the urban local centres. However, as the Council acknowledges in defining the centres, whilst
the rural local centres are substantially smaller and have fewer units than the urban centres,
they still serve an important role and function and therefore, the designation within the local
plan is important.
Table 3.8: Average Catchment Composition
Average Catchment Population
Centre Category 5 Minute Walk Time Isochrone 10 Minute Walk Time Isochrone
Urban Local Centres 1,765 5,220
Rural Local Centres 986 2,195
Table 3.8 shows that the urban catchments on average support significantly greater
populations within the five and ten-minute walk time catchments respectively. This
corresponds with the average centre composition in that the urban local centres have a
greater proportion of retail services to support the larger catchments. A full analysis of the
walk time catchments is included within Section 6 of this report. These averages have also
assisted in reviewing the required composition of new local centres at Section 5 of this report.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
24The findings are generally consistent with what we would expect for local centres. It should
however be noted that, when omitting the West End local centre, which is subject to
significant vacancy levels from the average calculation, the average number of vacant units in
the urban local centres is zero, demonstrating the strong performance of the defined local
centres.
Socio-Demographics
As part of our wider analysis of existing local centres and the scale and nature of the provision
within these, we have also carried out an analysis of social demographic data based the 10-
minute walk time catchments generated from each local centre point to assess the economic
make-up of the immediate population of each centre. This can then be fed back into our
analysis of the health and uses of the existing centres, to establish the nature and overall offer
in comparison to the socio demographics of the surrounding population.
We identified several key indicators to inform the analysis and establish if the resident’s data
corresponds with the findings of the health check assessments. Data was generated using
Experian MMG3 software and based on Population Estimates for UK – 2015 Experian mid-year
estimates (November 2016). We reviewed the following factors available within the data set:
▪ Car Ownership;
▪ Economically Active (Rate of Employment);
▪ Economically Inactive; and
▪ Health.
To interpret the results, our findings for each 10-minute walk time catchment have been
averaged and compared against the statistics for the Lancaster District and UK wide. The
tables outlining our findings can be found at Appendix 7.
Car Ownership
In terms of car ownership, an average of 47.3% of households within the combined
catchments own 1 car or van. This is slightly greater than the overall Lancaster District figure
of 45.6% and national figure of 42.2%. An average of 22.5% of households within the
combined catchments do not own at least one car or van. This statistic is lower than the
Lancaster District average of 24.5% and national average of 26.1%. These figures indicate
that households within the local centre catchments have greater access to at least one car or
van that the Lancaster District as well as nationally. This finding is consistent with what we
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
25would expect for catchments served by local centres (or similar designations). Given the
limited services provided at local centres, it is often necessary for residents to travel elsewhere
to access some retail and service needs, particularly comparison goods retail.
When reviewing the findings from individual catchments, most notably we identified that car
or van ownership within the five rural local centres is significantly greater than in the urban
local centres, the centres representing the five lowest percentages for households with no cars
or vans, the lowest being Hornby at 9.5%. This can be attributed to Hornby being the most
remote of the five rural local centres, located approximately 15 kilometres from Lancaster city
centre. It would be unusual if households within this catchment did not have an increased
access to private vehicles due to the necessity to travel and the limited levels of public
transport provision (typically concentrated on public bus services). There is also a higher
proportion of households within the rural local centres that own 2 or more cars or vans. Again,
this is to be expected given the limited access to services and employment within these
catchments. The findings also emphasise the importance of the rural local centres in serving
the needs of the small number of households that do not have access to a car or van.
In terms of the urban local centre catchments, at 42.9%, West End has a significantly greater
proportion of households that do not have access to a car or van than the other centres.
When cross referencing this statistic against the economic status of residents within the West
End catchment, which has a population of 3,089 (the highest of all the local centre
catchments), we have found the residents in and immediately surrounding West End (i.e. the
ten minute walktime) have the highest unemployment rate amongst economically active
residents, as well as the highest proportion of economically inactive residents. The lower
proportion of car or van ownership within this catchment could be directly attributed to the
above. Notwithstanding this, West End is well-connected and near Morecambe town centre,
benefitting from good public transport links. Equally this could also be a factor attributing to
the lower levels of car or van ownership within the catchment as well as the economic status
of the residents.
It should be noted that the Experian population data does not account for student
accommodation within the household projections. It has therefore not been possible to
undertake a car ownership analysis for the Lancaster University catchment.
Economically Active Residents
3.03 Economically active residents are categorised by the following sub-categories:
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
26▪ Employee Part Time;
▪ Employee Full Time;
▪ Self Employed (With Employees) Part Time;
▪ Self Employed (With Employees) Full Time;
▪ Self Employed (Without Employees) Part Time;
▪ Self Employed (Without Employees) Full Time;
▪ Unemployed; and
▪ Student.
We found the combined local centre catchments to have an average unemployment rate of
3.2% for economically active residents. This is marginally lower than the overall Lancaster
District average of 3.3% and lower than the national average of 4.4%, indicating that, on the
most part unemployment is not a significant issue within the local centre catchments. The
lowest levels of unemployment are present within the rural local centre catchments, in
particularly within the Bolton-le-Sands and Silverdale catchments which have unemployment
levels of 1.4% and 1.6% respectively, typically demonstrating the more affluent areas. Our
health check assessments found Bolton-le-Sands and Silverdale to be relatively prosperous
local centres and this statistic identifies a relationship between vitality and low unemployment
within the district.
The highest levels of unemployment are present in Westgate (4.4%) and West End (7.3%).
The figure for West End is considerably higher than the national average. Again, this supports
the above findings linking the health of a centre to employment levels as our health check
assessment found West End to be in poor health and subject to considerable vacancies.
Many economically active residents within all catchments excluding Lancaster University,
Galgate and Silverdale, are in full time employment as an employee. Given that the university
campus provides significant on-site accommodation, it is no surprise that over 80.0% of the
Lancaster University catchment is accounted for by students. In terms of Silverdale, the
slightly lower levels of residents in full time employment as employees can be attributed to
relatively high levels of self-employed residents (without employees) working both full time
and part time. Galgate is subject to a relatively high student population which accounts for
over 20.0% of the catchment, which can be attributed to its location approximately 1
kilometre south of the Bailrigg Garden Village university campus.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
27Economically Inactive Residents
Economically inactive residents are categorised by the following sub-categories:
▪ Retired;
▪ Student (Including Full Time Students);
▪ Looking After Home or Family;
▪ Long Term Sick or Disabled; and
▪ Other.
We found most economic inactivity within the local centre catchments to be directly related to
the proportions of residents in retirement and or those that are students. Firstly, Bowerham
and Galgate local centres are both located near the University campus and the statistics reflect
this with the student population of economically inactive residents accounting for 56.5% and
73.9% respectively. The catchment for the Lancaster University local centre also has a 98.0%
student population.
The second sub-factor contributing predominately to economic inactivity within the local
centre catchments is retirement, accounting for many economically inactive residents. The
Silverdale catchment has the highest proportion of retirees (77.5%), with the Bare, Hornby
and Bolton-le-Sands catchments also accommodating levels of retirees more than 70.0%
(74.6%, 72.7% and 71.5% respectively). These findings show clearly that the rural
settlements have the greatest proportion of retirees in the district. In West End retirement
accounts for only 32.5% of the economically inactive population. This can be attributed to
high numbers of economically inactive residents either looking after home or family (14.9%)
or being long term sick or disabled (28.8%). The proportion of long term sick or disabled
residents in West End is significantly greater than the Lancaster District average of 12.0% and
national average of 14.5% respectively. This shows that the West End catchment is subject to
unproportionate levels of residents suffering from long term sickness or disability. This
supports the findings of the previous sections that there is a link between the health of
centres in a retail context and negative population sub-category statistics, and the general lack
of expenditure available to support ‘healthy’ local centres.
Health
The health statistics are assessed against five sub categories which comprise; very good,
good, fair, bad and very bad.
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
28We have found that within the local centre catchments, the highest proportion of residents are
consistently categorised as having ‘very good health’. There are no instances where a
catchment is subject to a majority of residents within the ‘very good’ sub-category.
Furthermore, the average figure of 46.4% of residents within the local centre catchments
categorised as having ‘very good’ health is lower, albeit marginally than the Lancaster District
average of 46.8% and national average of 47.6%. Notwithstanding this, the ‘very good’ and
‘good’ sub-categories combined account for the majority of residents consistently across all of
the local centre catchments.
When combining the proportions of residents categorised as having ‘bad’ and ‘very bad’
health, the Westgate and West End catchments are subject to the highest combined
proportions of residents with poor health. This corresponds with findings of the economically
inactive analysis, where these areas were found to have the highest proportion of residents
suffering from long term sickness or disability.
Conclusion
Overall, we have found that many of the 10-minute walk time catchments associated with the
proposed local centres are subject to a social demographic make-up that is broadly consistent
to national averages. The relatively high student population within the district does, to some
extent, generate inconsistencies when assessing against the national averages. However, this
is by no means an issue and represents local circumstances, the student population playing a
key role in supporting the local economy, in particularly for the Bowerham, Galgate and
Lancaster University local centres.
We found that West End was a consistent anomaly, in that it returned negative statistics
across all four of the factors assessed. The West End catchment is subject to the lowest
proportion of car and van owners, the highest unemployment rate, the highest proportion of
long term sick or disabled residents and the second highest proportion of residents with poor
health. It is clear, given the findings of our health check assessment that there is a direct
correlation between the health of a designated centre in a retail context and its social
demographic make-up, which in the case of West End has found to be poor on both counts.
As set out above, West End currently suffers from considerable vacancy levels and is not
considered to be performing its proposed role as a local centre. The 10-minute walk time
catchment for West End comprises a population of 6,257, which represents the highest
proportion of residents located within a local centre catchment. This worsens the findings of
www.wyg.com creative minds safe hands
29You can also read
